[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: I'm not a huge fan of systemd

berenger.morel@neutralite.org writes:

> Le 09.07.2014 15:40, Mark Carroll a écrit :
>> Martin Read <zen75502@zen.co.uk> writes:
>>> On 09/07/14 05:07, Steve Litt wrote:
>>> [regarding double fork]
>>>> In other words, it's going to bust my program, right?
>>> Maybe. Do the programs you launch need to outlive your session? If 
>>> so,
>>> your launcher program's design will run into problems in a systemd 
>>> world.
>>> If not, you should be fine.
>> Hang on, that sounds scary. I'll still be able to launch something
>> from the shell (maybe in an xterm) with a trailing & to put it in
>> the background, and then log out and it will keep on going, right?
>> I may not have been paying enough attention ...
> I thought that, currently, if you close the parent of "something" you 
> have started with '&', "something" will die.
> Do you speak about nohup instead?

Not knowingly. I ssh in to a machine with bash as my login shell, start
something in the background, log out, log back in, and it's still
running. For instance,

mtbc@samuel:~$ sleep 12345 &
[1] 4052
mtbc@samuel:~$ exit
Connection to samuel closed.

but reconnect later and,

mtbc@samuel:~$ ps awux | grep sleep
mtbc      4052  0.0  0.0   5792   352 ?        S    22:08   0:00 sleep 12345
mtbc      4138  0.0  0.1   8028   836 pts/3    S+   22:08   0:00 grep sleep

Will systemd change that? Maybe it depends how "session" is defined. Or
maybe ssh / bash are implicitly doing some nohup-like thing?

-- Mark

Reply to: