On Wed, 20.11.13 10:16, Colin Guthrie ([email protected]) wrote: > Hi, > > One other thing occurred this morning while pondering the latest patches > from Martin and Colin on this topic. > > What should (in an ideal world) apps like screen do?
I used to believe that screen should set up a new session, but I don't think so anymore. Nowadays think they should do exactly what they currently do: fork and stay around. This will cause the session to stay in "closing" state when the user logs out, but that's exactly what it would be good for: i.e. sessions which have officially finished but of which some parts remain. > Perhaps this is all OK, and the "closing" state here is not a problem. > But such apps and use cases really are not compatible at all with the > kill-session-processes= option of pam_systemd and it would be nice to do > things properly. If user session killing is enabled then this is explicitly supposed to be the admins way to prohibit things like screen if the user is not logged in otherwise. Hence I think the exact right thing happens already: if the admin doesn't want to allow screen to stay around then he can use that option. Otherwise he should leave it on. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
