What breakage does this actually fix?
What breakage does this actually fix?
Posted Jun 8, 2016 11:21 UTC (Wed) by matthias (subscriber, #94967)In reply to: What breakage does this actually fix? by NAR
Parent article: Distributors ponder a systemd change
And asking that the administrator should do the job of session management seems like a joke to me. It is enough work when the administrator has to react to a user doing malicious things on purpose.
I expect that the usual tools for having background processes are changed before this change hits stable distributions. Before that, disabling the feature is a reasonable choice. tmux and screen could need proper session management (using PAM) anyway (e.g., to avoid that the ssh-agent gets terminated when the user logs out). The current behaviour looks broken even without the systemd change. PAM will do the necessary things to avoid systemd killing the tmux/screen session in this case. I do not see a problem, when a distribution, which uses systemd as PID 1, needs a version of nohup that is linked against libsystemd.
Once theese changes are in place, the distributions can enable the feature again.
Posted Jun 8, 2016 13:18 UTC (Wed)
by NAR (subscriber, #1313)
[Link]
What breakage does this actually fix?