On Wed, 2016-06-01 at 12:28 +0100, Tom Hughes wrote:
On 01/06/16 12:19, Howard Chu wrote:
> This is still looking at the problem back-asswards. The problem
> that screen and tmux are special cases. The problem is that some
> of programs that got spawned in a GUI desktop environment are
> cases, not exiting when they should.
I'm sorry, but I disagree.
There are basically three things that I'm aware of that are used from
user session to run something in background in a way that will
the end of the user session and you named them - nohup, screen and
You forgot emacs.
Yes, really, emacs the text editor -- which happens to have a server
mode that allows it to do something similar to what tmux does, but more
emacs-specific. Now you're thinking, "Is anyone using that?!" Yes,
people use it -- someone at a Lisp user group was shocked that I had
emacs running in a tmux session and told me all about the emacs server
and how great it is.
So things which are intended to survive the end of a login session
really are the special case. The default behaviour has always been
things are killed when you logout,
No, the default behavior has been that *some* things are killed when
you log out. There are plenty of well-documented ways to avoid
receiving SIGHUP and a large ecosystem of software out there that
expects those techniques to work. Yes it is possible to push
ecosystem-wide fixes, but it is a massive undertaking that needs to
have real motivation. What is the strong motivation for this change?
Why should anyone change their workflow, patch their code, or do
anything unrelated to their day job to accommodate this new and