[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: attaching detached sessions to the current one

From: Aaron Davies
Subject: Re: attaching detached sessions to the current one
Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 13:06:22 -0400

Yeah, pretty much. I got tired of going "ctrl-a a a a a <space>" to
change screens. Anyone here know the Telnet Song, by Guy Steele and
Knuth? Screen is the modern incarnation. :-)

These days, my standard .*profile finshes up with a prompt asking me
whether I want to run screen or not, and executes it as "-R -DD" if I
say I do.

I'd certainly be happy to put a screen wrapper in my profile if it
meant I could attach arbitrary processes.

On 5/16/06, Joe Zbiciak <address@hidden> wrote:

 I tried something like that once and found it too annoying.  Mainly, I ran into the oddball sorts 
of TERMCAP / backspace / etc. issues too often when logging in from "strange" hosts.  
Also, what happens when you ssh from host A to host B?  If every session I have open is runs 
screen, it really messes with ssh'ing host to host.  It's those sort of issues that lead me to 
desire a "screen-ultra-lite" that is always safe to fork into.

 Some parts of it become less annoying if screen sprouts the ability to hand 
FDs between instances of itself on the local host.  The nested-instance issue, 
though, only starts to become sane if screen learns how to detect the nested 
instance and has a protocol for giving the illusion that the top-level and 
nested instances are a single instance.  (That actually would be really cool.)

 (BTW, I apologize for the new Outlook-style message quoting and formatting.  I 
need to see if I can somehow switch the new Yahoo email beta to do more 
traditional-style email quoting and formatting.)



We sell Spatulas, and that's all!

----- Original Message ----
From: Phil!Gregory <address@hidden>
To: address@hidden
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 10:46:17 AM
Subject: Re: attaching detached sessions to the current one

* Joe Zbiciak <address@hidden> [2006-05-16 06:34 -0700]:
> If screen develops the capability to import TTY FDs from another
> process, then the answer may be as simple as a wrapper around your shell
> that does little more than hold the FDs for your TTY, and pipes them
> through.

But then you'd have to manually set up the wrapper to run on all of your
processes.  As long as you're going to the trouble, why not just make the
leap and run everything in screen?  That's what I do, and it means that I
never have to worry that something might not be detachable.
Aaron Davies

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]