ref: nohup (GNU coreutils) 8.23
1] Wouldn't it be useful for nohup to indicate the PID of the process it
spawns?
1.1] What comes to mind would be to have nohup send the PID to
either STDOUT or STDERR, and also to send it as a first line to its
output file.
1.1.1] It would also be helpful for
On 02/18/2018 12:26 PM, Boruch Baum wrote:
1] Wouldn't it be useful for nohup to indicate the PID of the process it
spawns?
nohup(1) does *not* create a new process. Instead, it invokes execve to replace
its own image with that of the new one (in the same process), i.e., there is no
new PID.
On 2018-02-19 00:14, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> Have a nice day,
> Berny
Thank you for the kind wishes. I hope the list will continue to consider
the entirety of the suggestions in my post.
--
hkp://keys.gnupg.net
CA45 09B5 5351 7C11 A9D1 7286 0036 9E45 1595 8BC0
On 02/19/2018 12:30 AM, Boruch Baum wrote:
I hope the list will continue to consider
the entirety of the suggestions in my post.
What exactly do you refer to? I think the other suggestions
seem to be based on knowing the PID, so given that this doesn't change
due to execve(), a workaround seem
On Monday, February 19, 2018 12:30:33 AM CET Boruch Baum wrote:
> On 2018-02-19 00:14, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> > Have a nice day,
> > Berny
>
> Thank you for the kind wishes. I hope the list will continue to consider
> the entirety of the suggestions in my post.
As far as I can tell, all your s
On 2018-02-19 09:17, Kamil Dudka wrote:
> As far as I can tell, all your suggestions can be implemented as a shell
> script that uses the current implementation of nohup. Have you tried it?
Yes. I didn't post the suggestion in order to have the coreutils team
solve a personal problem of mine. The
Dear Boruch,
Let me start out by saying that your request of doing something new in a
compiled tool, which can be done with scripting in the shell as it works
now, albeit with a slight bit more typing, goes directly against the UNIX
mentality of "do one thing, and do it well" modular design paradi
