up vote 1 down vote favorite
share [g+] share [fb]

In both scenarios:

  1. SSH access

  2. Direct access

link|improve this question
74% accept rate
feedback

4 Answers

up vote 6 down vote accepted

Background processes will be killed.

You have to use "nohup" or "screen" to keep them alive.

link|improve this answer
+1 for screen. Once you start using it you will wonder how you ever coped without it. – Graeme Donaldson Jul 20 '09 at 14:51
I think it is not correct that background processes will be killed. Try "sleep 1000 &", close the terminal and look in the process list. – robcast Jul 23 '09 at 15:42
+1 for screen though. – robcast Jul 23 '09 at 15:43
feedback
up vote 4 down vote

If you're using bash, you also have access to the 'disown' built-in which dissasociates all backgrounded jobs from the current session. That will let you quit your current session and have them continue on. You won't be able to foreground those jobs in another shell so if that's your aim you'll need to look at screen.

The disown command is useful however if you started the job in the background and don't want to have it exit when you log out or close your terminal.

link|improve this answer
Very helpful – Jader Dias Jul 20 '09 at 14:45
feedback
up vote 0 down vote

I'm not sure what exactly you're trying to accomplish, but have you tried running the "Screen" command?

http://www.rackaid.com/resources/linux-tutorials/general-tutorials/using-screen/

link|improve this answer
feedback
up vote 0 down vote

You really should be using "screen" as already proposed.

But technically a process will continue running if you backgrounded it with "&" and it does not do any input or output to the no-longer-existing terminal.

link|improve this answer
feedback

Your Answer

 
or
required, but never shown
discard

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.