. You must have the wrong executable.
- Original Message -
From: Yaron Zabary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 1999 8:17 Night
Subject: Re: Short question
>
> Die thread, die.
>
> -- Yaron.
>
>
>
I do apologize to you all for making a fool out of myself.
Best,
--Ariel
--
Ariel Biener
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Work phone: 03-640608
fingerprint = 07 D1 E5 3E EF 6D E5 82 0B E9 21 D4 3C 7D 8B BC
=
To unsubscrib
Die thread, die.
-- Yaron.
=
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ariel Biener
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I was referring to something else completely, and thus this
> misunderstanding.
>
> To better explain.
>
> If you try backgrounding a process why it waits for input:
>
> host:~> ftp host
> ftp> ^Z
> Suspended
> host:~> bg
> [1
On 11 Aug 1999, Adam Morrison wrote:
No, you're right.
I was referring to something else completely, and thus this
misunderstanding.
To better explain.
If you try backgrounding a process why it waits for input:
host:~> ftp host
ftp> ^Z
Suspended
host:~> bg
[1]ftp ftp &
host:~>
[1] + Su
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ariel Biener
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Second, ftp WILL exit when it loses the control terminal. Try it, from
> bash or tcsh.
I explained this behavior previously.
When the terminal goes away, the program will start getting
errors on write()s to the
On Wed, 11 Aug 1999, Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo wrote:
THANKS !
FInally a sane voice among the croud.
What I meant is that most Unix utils are designed to DO SOMETHING when
they look for the control terminal (waiting for input, or write output),
and they have a decision making clause when t
AB>> In fact, most Unix utilities will exit when losing the control terminal.
Depends on what do you mean on "losing". If you do the following:
run ftp
background it while it's busy (i.e., not reading from terminal, like in
downloading)
desintegrate parent shell process (like kill -9)
then ftp
On 11 Aug 1999, Adam Morrison wrote:
First of all, I said jobs wont exit when run with nohup, unless your
reading capability is less than your unix knowledge.
Second, ftp WILL exit when it loses the control terminal. Try it, from
bash or tcsh.
In fact, most Unix utilities will exit when losin
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ariel Biener
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Most things you run in the backround (like ftp, irc, and such) install
> their own handlers.
``Oh, really?''
% find /usr/src/usr.bin/ftp/ | xargs grep SIGHUP
%
And as for IRC, it EXITS on a SIGHUP.
On 11 Aug 1999, Adam Morrison wrote:
Hi Adam,
Most things you run in the backround (like ftp, irc, and such) install
their own handlers.
In fact, you have to know for sure that the job you run has not installed
a signal handler.
So, practically, the job must:
1). not be interactive.
2).
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ariel Biener
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Does anybody know a shell command that allows me to run something in the
> > > background immediately?
> >
> > Use nohup if you're using a Bourne shell (sh) descendant.
> >
> > Just use `&' if you're using a C shell (csh) d
On 10 Aug 1999, Adam Morrison wrote:
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Isaac Aaron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Does anybody know a shell command that allows me to run something in the
> > background immediately?
>
> Use nohup if you're using a Bourne shell (sh) descendant.
>
> Just use `&' if yo
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Isaac Aaron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Does anybody know a shell command that allows me to run something in the
> background immediately?
Use nohup if you're using a Bourne shell (sh) descendant.
Just use `&' if you're using a C shell (csh) descendant.
For this purpo
On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Isaac Aaron wrote:
> Does anybody know a shell command that allows me to run something in the
> background immediately?
>
> I've looked in to the alternatives -
>
> at: Doesn't fit my need. I need to run it now.
> batch: Batch run a process immed. only if the load average is
On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Yaron Zabary wrote:
You can also use `screen'.
--Ariel
> On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Isaac Aaron wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > Does anybody know a shell command that allows me to run something in the
> > background immediately?
> >
> > I've looked in to the alternatives -
> >
> > at: Do
For processes that need input, just redirect /dev/null ( < /dev/null).
"Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo" wrote:
>
> IA>> issuing the command with the & sign: This will run as a nested process.
> IA>> When I'll close the terminal, the command will shut with it.
>
> nohup is your friend. Also an i
use : YOUR_COMMAND &
Mike
Isaac Aaron wrote:
> Hi
>
> Does anybody know a shell command that allows me to run something in the
> background immediately?
>
> I've looked in to the alternatives -
>
> at: Doesn't fit my need. I need to run it now.
> batch: Batch run a process immed. only if the l
On Mon, 9 Aug 1999, Isaac Aaron wrote:
> Hi
>
> Does anybody know a shell command that allows me to run something in the
> background immediately?
>
> I've looked in to the alternatives -
>
> at: Doesn't fit my need. I need to run it now.
You could
at now + 0 minutes
> batch: Batch run
IA>> issuing the command with the & sign: This will run as a nested process.
IA>> When I'll close the terminal, the command will shut with it.
nohup is your friend. Also an interesting fact - if you _already_ run the
process via & and now want it to remain after shell exits, just kill -9
the shel
Hi
Does anybody know a shell command that allows me to run something in the
background immediately?
I've looked in to the alternatives -
at: Doesn't fit my need. I need to run it now.
batch: Batch run a process immed. only if the load average is lower than
0.8.
cron: Same as at.
issuing the com
21 matches
Mail list logo
