exit and kill background jobs?

  • Follow


Solaris8 Sparc, sh or ksh:

I'm using the following in my .profile to get around the 900s
connection timeout on the corp. firewall (ssh/telnet):

(while true;do sleep 600;echo "";done)&

And while it works well, I have to type exit twice or kill the bg job
before exiting, which is really annoying:

[sgpws01]/root # exit
You have running jobs
[sgpws01]/root # exit
Connection to sgpws01 closed.

I've tried a variety of traps and aliases to kill the job before
exiting, but nothing seems to work:

[sgpws01]/root # alias e='kill %1;exit'
[sgpws01]/root # e
You have running jobs
[sgpws01]/root # e

<.profile>
trap 'kill %1; exit' 0

Any idea how I can have my cake and eat it too?

TIA, krp
0
Reply kpacek 4/2/2004 11:19:21 PM

G'Day,

Looks like you were on the right track. In ksh try,

        alias exit="kill %1;wait $!;exit"

(double quotes are needed for $!, and aliases are parsed before builtins
so "exit" will work).

.... You've said this was both sh and ksh - if it were just ksh I'd check
if the TMOUT variable was set to cause the timeout.

Brendan Gregg

[Sydney, Australia]


On 2 Apr 2004, Kevin R. Pacek wrote:

> Solaris8 Sparc, sh or ksh:
>
> I'm using the following in my .profile to get around the 900s
> connection timeout on the corp. firewall (ssh/telnet):
>
> (while true;do sleep 600;echo "";done)&
>
> And while it works well, I have to type exit twice or kill the bg job
> before exiting, which is really annoying:
>
> [sgpws01]/root # exit
> You have running jobs
> [sgpws01]/root # exit
> Connection to sgpws01 closed.
>
> I've tried a variety of traps and aliases to kill the job before
> exiting, but nothing seems to work:
>
> [sgpws01]/root # alias e='kill %1;exit'
> [sgpws01]/root # e
> You have running jobs
> [sgpws01]/root # e
>
> <.profile>
> trap 'kill %1; exit' 0
>
> Any idea how I can have my cake and eat it too?
>
> TIA, krp
>

0
Reply Brendan 4/3/2004 3:57:48 AM


1 Replies
610 Views

(page loaded in 0.063 seconds)

Similiar Articles:













7/20/2012 1:21:53 PM


Reply: