From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28021 invoked by alias); 2 Sep 2010 15:06:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 28225 Received: (qmail 19305 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2010 15:06:21 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at klanderman.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) From: Greg Klanderman To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: have '&' automatically disown? Reply-To: greg@klanderman.net Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 10:57:50 -0400 In-Reply-To: <100207143647.ZM9122@torch.brasslantern.com> (Bart Schaefer's message of "Sun, 07 Feb 2010 14:36:47 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) XEmacs/21.4.17 (linux) References: <201002072134.o17LYj66005365@pws-pc.ntlworld.com> <100207143647.ZM9122@torch.brasslantern.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >>>>> On February 7, 2010 Bart Schaefer wrote: > On Feb 7, 9:34pm, Peter Stephenson wrote: > } Subject: Re: have '&' automatically disown? > } > } Greg Klanderman wrote: > } > Would it make sense to just auto-disown when monitor is off? > } > } That *does* make a lot of sense, actually: if job control's turned off, > } there's no point in half-pretending it isn't. Disowning existing > } background jobs at that point at least makes more sense than having them > } come back in a zombified fashion. I'll think about it tomorrow. > Disowning a job makes it immune to HUP signals, etc. That's not what > nomonitor is for -- turning off monitor is supposed to make zsh act > like the old Bourne shell, where jobs still "belonged" to the shell > and would be HUP'd if the terminal connection dropped, but the shell > had no way move them between background and foreground. [sorry for neglecting to reply for so long] Would it make sense to auto-disown if both nomonitor and nohup are set? Greg