On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 15:38 -0700, Suvayu Ali wrote: > Hi Patrick, > > Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 08:02 -0700, Suvayu Ali wrote: > >> > >> I often find nohup very unreliable. I have had jobs fail submitted with > >> nohup. I was thinking of switching to using screen. Maybe you could give > >> that a try? > > > > Screen is not an option if you want to set up a long-running job and log > > out. In what way has nohup failed on you? It's one of the oldest > > commands in the Shell toolbox and I've never had a problem with it. > > > > Note that it's often a good idea to run it thus: > > > > nohup command > OUTPUT 2>&1 & > > Whenever I have used nohup I have used it exactly the way you have > mentioned. And many times I later found out my job had failed when I had > logged out. Since then I have stopped using nohup and wanted to look > into screen. Until I do that I just don't log out any more unless I am > sure my job has finished. Maybe the unreliability I have experienced is > due to the versions of nohup I use (what ever comes as default with > Scientific Linux 4, thats way too old).
I guess commands under nohup can fail if they expect to send output to a physical terminal, which presumably screen handles better. I can't think what other reason could make them fail. Anything written to be used as a filter shouldn't have this problem, but of course it depends what you're doing. poc -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
