On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 11:30:06AM -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
I use my computer for lots of automation like collecting weather and
Pepco powerline data, getting the book of the day, ebay sniping, etc.
They all run as either persistent processes or user cron jobs. I am
normally logged in, of course, but the current setup works even if I
go on vacation and/or the system reboots. I think it would be a
mistake to forbid it or even make it difficult to use.
AFAICT cron/etc isn't affected by this proposal as its jobs are already
launched as part of a service.
> Anyway, here's an actual idea: could systemd and GNOME
> terminal programs (things invoked in gnome-terminal, via ssh, etc) to
> persist and things that are graphical or dbus to not persist? For
> example, GNOME could stick everything into a scope that is killed when
> the GNOME session ends, gnome-terminal could split its children into a
> different scope, and ssh sessions could have a scope that always
> lingers (if permitted)?
This looks promising, but it seems to introduce a mysterious,
hard-to-discover duality (some processes get killed and some don't). There
should be an easy way to a) specify, b) tell which one is is which, and to
discover post-factum why the process was killed.
I doubt I'm alone in launching graphical desktop stuff from a terminal
command prompt; stuff I absolutely want to get killed when I log out.
The processes that one wants to linger are the exceptions here, not the
norm -- and there's no blanket heuristic one can use to tell the
difference. that said, if it's invoked via screen/tmux/nohup/etc that's
a good indication..
Solomon Peachy pizza at shaftnet dot org
Delray Beach, FL ^^ (email/xmpp) ^^
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.