many tails

[Mike - EMAIL IGNORED]

On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 08:45:32 +1100, Cameron Simpson wrote:

> On 05Dec2006 19:47, Andy Green <andy at warmcat.com> wrote:
> | Mike - EMAIL IGNORED wrote:
> | >On FC4 with KDE, I ran ps -ef and noticed that there
> | >were many old /usr/bin/tail processes.  They all
> | >looked like tail -f that I had run.[...]
> | >but if I close a KDE window on a
> | >tail -f without ctrl.c, the processes persists.
> | >
> | >Is this the way it should be?
> | 
> | I believe so... if the tail did not subsequently try to show any more 
> | output.  Only when it tries to issue more output to the now gone-away 
> | terminal session would it get a signal that would end up killing it.
> 
> Um, I'm not so sure.
> 
> A foreground tail -f should get a SIGHUP and quit. A background one may
> behave as you describe, being in a different process group.
> 
> Mike: were your "tail -f"s foreground or background?
[...]

I always do these in the foreground and do not keep
them for long.  They are always on logs managed by
logrotate, and additional output would usually be
expected.

Mike.

expect to