On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Andrew Lutomirski <luto(a)mit.edu> wrote:
On Oct 7, 2016 1:29 PM, "Frank Ch. Eigler"
> >> > [...] I always run dnf manually from the
> >> > command line, in a VT logged in as root. And I can run X while doing
> >> > this and I've never had a dnf update issue.
> To the extent that the problem is that dnf gets interrupted when its
> xterm dies, can that be worked around by dnf SIG_IGN'ing SIGHUP /
> SIGPIPE? Users could still deliberately interrupt it with SIGINT, but a
> terminal closure could in theory let it finish unmolested.
Python is weird^Wspecial. See the bug I opened.
I must suggest that "nohup dnf whatever > logfile.out &" is your
friend for exactly this sort of thing. stdin/stdout/stderr are all
disconnected from the running session and a visible log is generated.
And this is *much, much* easier than trying to repair legacy
architectures of complexity to preserve the status of an associated
terminal wound through X windows and Gnome and "sophisticated feature
filled architecture of the week".
It doesn't fix the underlying mishandling of terminal session loss.
But it can get you and others trapped through the short term.