> > On 2007-08-29 at 00:44:38 [+0200], Axel Dörfler <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > wrote: > > Ingo Weinhold <bonefish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Personally I find this more than a bit inconsistent and wonder, > > > if we > > > want > > > to change that behavior. Any opinions? > > > > I'd be all for it, too. I guess you suggest to enable the "shopt -s > > huponexit" by default? > > Well, either that or change the SIGHUP handling to leave existing > jobs > alone. I actually tend towards liking that stuff I fire up into the > background survives closing the terminal (as under BeOS). It would > also > avoid risking data loss (imagine you started an editor into the > background). But I suppose it mainly depends on what you're used > to... Though usually you use nohup to make sure of that. François.