|
Home > Archive > Unix Shell > May 2007 > bash set -m
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| tmp123 2007-05-18, 7:20 am |
| Hello,
This small script:
foo.sh
------
#!/bin/bash
#
set -m
sleep 60
when executed in a interactive shell, typing:
../foo.sh &
finishes the interactive shell (that is, ends its parent).
However, the following works like expected:
../foo.sh
or
../foo.sh > /dev/null 2>&1 &
I'm wondering if this is the expected way of work. Test are done using
bash and Solaris.
Thanks a lot.
| |
| Skye Shaw!@#$ 2007-05-20, 7:21 pm |
| On May 18, 5:16 am, tmp123 <tmp...@menta.net> wrote:
> #!/bin/bash
> #
> set -m
> sleep 60
>
> when executed in a interactive shell, typing:
>
> ./foo.sh &
>
> finishes the interactive shell (that is, ends its parent).
>
> However, the following works like expected:
>
> ./foo.sh
> or
> ./foo.sh > /dev/null 2>&1 &
>
> I'm wondering if this is the expected way of work. Test are done using
> bash and Solaris.
Strange... set -m causing the background foo.sh process to report
sleep's status, which in turn raises TTOU. When you redirect, there
is no IO on the term and it works fine.
set -m
sleep 60&
works. Hum.....................
On May 18, 5:16 am, tmp123 <tmp...@menta.net> wrote:
> #!/bin/bash
> #
> set -m
> sleep 60
>
> when executed in a interactive shell, typing:
>
> ./foo.sh &
>
> finishes the interactive shell (that is, ends its parent).
>
> However, the following works like expected:
>
> ./foo.sh
> or
> ./foo.sh > /dev/null 2>&1 &
>
> I'm wondering if this is the expected way of work. Test are done using
> bash and Solaris.
Strange... seems maybe set -m causes the background foo.sh process to
report sleep's status, which in turn raises TTOU. When you redirect,
there is no IO on the term and it works fine.
With set -m on, it seems one cant trap this signal either.
set -m
sleep 60&
Works. Additional thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|