begin quoting Wade Curry as of Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 04:09:07PM -0700: > SJS([EMAIL PROTECTED])@Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 03:45:49PM -0700: [snip] > > Redirections are a function of your shell. By the time a program > > runs, all of the redirection has been dealt with. > > > > Will _tee_ handle the closing of the output stream nicely? > > > > Does nohup apply to all parts of a pipe? Or would you have to put > > nohup before each piece? > > I wasn't aware of a shell builtin. A cursory scan of `man > bash-builtins` didn't turn up anything about it. The man page for
Oh, I default to *csh, not bash. I generally work under the assumption that bash has copied most of tcsh anyway. My fault for not testing lesser shells. Zsh doesn't have it either. My fault not testing nominally superior shells. > nohup, however, simply says that it makes the command ignore > hang-up signals. The few times I've used it in the past, the > redirections were left alone. Don't know if I've ever actually > used it with a pipe, though. > > If the desire is to simply send STDOUT and STDERR to separate > files, though, then you don't really need a pipe. > > nohup <command> [options] 1>filename.txt 2>otherfile.txt & Didn't we just cover streams in painful depth? > Something like the above usually does the trick for me. I guess I > should specify /usr/bin/nohup in the future, though. I like the idea of using screen, as attaching to a running process has appeal. I can kill it with ^C, for example, which makes me all warm and fuzzy inside. -- Control-C is not copy! Were you raised in a barn in Redmond or something? Stewart Stremler -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
