Re: nohup Versus setsid

On 2024-09-12, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

It has long seemed to me that nohup(1) was an old, hacky way of doing
what can be done more elegantly using setsid(1). Compare the docs for
yourself <https://manpages.debian.org/1/nohup.1.en.html> vs
<https://manpages.debian.org/1/setsid.1.en.html>, and tell me why we
still need nohup when we have setsid?

Did you notice that this is comp.unix.shell, not comp.linux.shell?

You might use nohup when you're on a system that isn't Linux.

nohup is described in POSIX (and on GNU/Linux systems, it comes from
GNU Coreutils) whereas setsid (the command) is something from util-linux.

$ setsid
-bash: setsid: command not found
$ uname -a
Darwin m1box.example.net 21.6.0 Darwin Kernel Version 21.6.0: Mon Aug
22 20:20:05 PDT 2022; root:xnu-8020.140.49~2/RELEASE_ARM64_T8101 arm64
$ nohup
usage: nohup [--] utility [arguments]

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca