Steven Mocking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Note the small difference. The ls documentation informs what is done when the
> standard output is a terminal *and* what is done when stdout is _not_ a
> terminal. The nohup docs, on the other hand, only inform about behaviour _if_
> stdout is a terminal, not what happens if it isn't. Both ls and nohup have
> the property of acting differently in both cases, but in my opinion the ls
> documentation is a lot clearer. My proposal is to add following line to the
> mentioned paragraph in the info page of nohup:
>
> ""
> If standard output is not a terminal, the output from COMMAND is
> redirected to the standard output of nohup.
> ""

Thank you for the suggestion.
I've just made this change:

        (nohup invocation): Tell what happens when stdout is not a terminal.
        Based on a suggestion from Steven Mocking.

Index: doc/coreutils.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /fetish/cu/doc/coreutils.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.118
diff -u -p -u -p -r1.118 coreutils.texi
--- doc/coreutils.texi  13 Jul 2003 08:45:39 -0000      1.118
+++ doc/coreutils.texi  13 Jul 2003 09:35:39 -0000
@@ -11267,6 +11267,8 @@ If standard output is a terminal, it is
 to the file @file{nohup.out}; if that cannot be written to, it is appended
 to the file @file{$HOME/nohup.out}.  If that cannot be written to, the
 command is not run.
+If standard output is not a terminal, then the standard output of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] will be the same as that of @command{nohup}.
 
 If @command{nohup} creates either @file{nohup.out} or
 @file{$HOME/nohup.out}, it creates it with no ``group'' or ``other''


> [0] Yes, that patch for an -o switch would have been a reinvention of a 
> practically undocumented wheel.

By the way, yesterday I rewrote nohup in C.

        * src/nohup.c: New file.  Rewrite of nohup.sh in C.
        This solves a portability problem: on at least Solaris systems,
        when nohup.sh used the vendor /bin/sh, it would exit with status
        of `1' rather than the required 126 or 127 upon failure to exec
        the specified program.



_______________________________________________
Bug-coreutils mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils

Reply via email to