dynamic nohup?

[David Nicol]

On 9/10/06, Jason D. Clinton <me at jasonclinton.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-09-10 at 20:57 -0500, Monty J. Harder wrote:
> > I must be thick.  Can you connect the dots between the two signals?
>
> There's nothing between them. If they absolutely _must_ use SIGHUP
> because, presumably, some third party program is sending it to their
> debugging target

ha ha ha ha ha

that third party program would be the sshd or the shell, whichever it is,
and the signal will arive when I end the session, and the goal is not
to ge a trace, but to ignore the signal.  The retronohup utility is exactly
what I was looking for.


-- 
Although efforts are under way to mitigate the problem, this message
may contain flippancy, hyperbole and/or confusing assertions.  Please
reply directly to fall2006sigfile at davidnicol.com for clarification of any points
appearing unclear, vague, cruel, frustrating, threatening, negative,
dilletantish or otherwise unprofessional before taking action based on
misintepretation or misconstruction of such points.