On Sun, Dec 07, 2025 at 11:31:13PM -0800, Greg A. Woods wrote: > At Mon, 08 Dec 2025 06:18:17 +0000, Van Ly <[email protected]> wrote: > Subject: Re: 11.0_BETA amd64 build aborted at `checkflist' > > > > "Greg A. Woods" <[email protected]> writes: > > > > > > You can also run build.sh in the background with nohup(1), which > > > effectively does the same thing with redirecting output, and will keep > > > running if you happen to be disconnected from the shell session where > > > you started it, though it has a hard-coded log file name ("nohup.out" in > > > the current working directory). > > > > > > Does a shell session inside tmux(1) also provide that continuity behavior? > > Hmmm... I believe it should, but I've never really used tmux. > > The only tricky part might be that if you are running the build in the > foreground then the PTY buffer will fill and I think it will stop > accepting more output, so everything might stall until you reattach.
It shouldn't stall, with GNU screen or tmux. Both allow output to continue to a disconnected session. > However if you're running the build under nohup and only viewing the log > with something like "tail -f" (or "less +F"), then only the "viewer" > process gets paused -- the build continues silently in the background > since it is just writing to the log file on disk. > > I started using unix long before "screen" and "tmux" existed so I > learned to deal with modem hangups an such things by making sure I used > nohup for anything I wanted to keep running even if such a thing > happened, and since all the editors I use make autosave files, I don't > mind so much if my session dies when I get disconnected (with the > exception of when I have to use a shell that doesn't save its > command-line history). > > I have also tended to always connect from the same kind of terminal (at > least after I left uni), so I didn't need the terminal type remapping > tricks the likes of screen and tmux must do. > > I also started using layers (AT&T Unix Layers, that is) windowing > terminals very early on, including the DMD5620, and then of course when > X11 became usable on the computers I used I could have many xterms open, > so I've never wanted a tool that could give me arbitrary windows on a > non-windowing terminal. > > These days the networks I use are reliable enough that I only very > rarely get disconnected from remote machines. The only problem is when > I want to restart my desktop machine and I have to disconnect everything > at once! If I could restart the X server with all existing clients > still connected that would be awesome! I've been a long time GNU screen user, starting on vt420 terminals, DECterms, xterminals (the real hardware kind), xterms, and many in between. I switched to tmux after discovering it, and not being able to get patches upstream to GNU screen, after having screen crash a few times. Although "the dungeon collapses" was kinda cute (nethack mode). Being able to connect to disconnected sessions from anywhere - even my phone at need, and keeping all the state, I don't think I could do without. I trend to run with ~20 "windows" in a session, on each machine I heavily interact with. We had a box running tmux with windows connected to serial ports as a heavyweight console server, at one point. -- Paul Ripke "Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people." -- Disputed: Often attributed to Eleanor Roosevelt. 1948.
