I did
$ echo echo work on nohup for gnu|at now+2 weeks
i.e. if nobody else 'fixes' it first, I'll try.
___
Bug-coreutils mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Please call the new option --output=FILE (no short-named option).
If you do this, please also update the documentation:
I see one detail here that needs to be nailed down.
One might think that the user could easily implement the equivalent of:
nohup
Dan Jacobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alfred It is so inflexible because you haven't bothered sending a patch.
I see. So you all think the concept is great, and doesn't violate any
standards, etc., so all that is left is writing the code. I will not
regret writing the code as the concept
Most importantly, how can nohup be so inflexible about where to put
its nohup.out?!
It is so inflexible because you haven't bothered sending a patch. So
you have only yourself to blame. Maybe instead of complaining only,
why not code this feature into nohup? Shouldn't take more then 10
The nohup man page doesn't even mention the nohup.out file, nor have
an address for bugs. Not looking at Info today.
Most importantly, how can nohup be so inflexible about where to put
its nohup.out?! Please allow us to explicitly turn it on and off, and
write to any filename we please, on any
