Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
I just took over a legacy application that launches background processes in GNU screen sessions rather than daemonizing them. I’m trying to figure out why the original programmer wrote it this way. Is there a good reason for launching processes in screen rather than forking them or launching them with nohup?
@Marc B comment presents a very good point (how unfortunate it is not an answer, it would be a good one!). Anyway, another reason I see is the fact that it is just too easy to use screen for pseudodaemonizing an application.
I, for one, do it a lot. For example, I am developing a Django application for my company, that I will present some time in the future. It is not complete but is useful to me, so I started it in a screen session and leaved it available for use when I need it.