The man page for screen says that I can create a detatched screen
running with a set command in it by doing this:

$ screen -dm $command

However, it doesn't work. Screen exits without creating the detached
screen.

If I say

$ screen $command

...I get dropped into a screen session running $command as I would
expect.

What's the magic invocation I'm missing?

Also, the next step will be for root to launch said screen session as
someone else during boot time; am I asking for trouble by trying it?

# su - user -c screen -dmS $Label $command

Thanks for any insights or pointers to web resources I can use to
learn from.
--
/oo/
/ /() David Mackintosh |
dave@xdroop.com | http://www.xdroop.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 01:02:07PM -0400, David Mackintosh wrote:
> The man page for screen says that I can create a detatched screen
> running with a set command in it by doing this:
>
> $ screen -dm $command
>
> However, it doesn't work. Screen exits without creating the detached
> screen.

screen -dm isn't the same as screen -d -m. Try the latter.

--
lfr
0/0
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 06:07:44PM +0100, Luciano Rocha wrote:
> > The man page for screen says that I can create a detatched screen
> > running with a set command in it by doing this:
> >
> > $ screen -dm $command
>
> screen -dm isn't the same as screen -d -m. Try the latter.

Figured it out.

While the first line of my shell script is

#!/bin/tcsh

...I am in fact a bash user. One of the things my script is
ultimately trying to do is to start multiple things from within
the screen session by use of teh screen command itself; because
of the shell swap, $STY doesn't seem to be getting set. If I
change the first line of my script to be #!/bin/bash, it works
as expected.

Thanks for looking.

--
/oo/
/ /() David Mackintosh |
dave@xdroop.com | http://www.xdroop.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 18:07 +0100, Luciano Rocha wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 01:02:07PM -0400, David Mackintosh wrote:
> > The man page for screen says that I can create a detatched screen
> > running with a set command in it by doing this:
> >
> > $ screen -dm $command
> >
> > However, it doesn't work. Screen exits without creating the detached
> > screen.
>
> screen -dm isn't the same as screen -d -m. Try the latter.

Just an FYI...

You *may* be right, however...

"Standards" dictate that "flags" can be combined into a single
parameter. This is "eased" (debatable IMO) by the "getopts" function in
bash, getopt(1) command and getopt(3) function call for C et al.

Unfortunately, *some* few programs do not implement this correctly. But
over the years, as programs have been "cleaned up" and replaced, their
number has (thankfully) diminished.

> <snip sig stuff>

I note the OP has solved it.

--
Bill

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

On Tuesday 22 July 2008, William L. Maltby wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-07-22 at 18:07 +0100, Luciano Rocha wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 01:02:07PM -0400, David Mackintosh wrote:
> > > The man page for screen says that I can create a detatched screen
> > > running with a set command in it by doing this:
> > >
> > > $ screen -dm $command
> > >
> > > However, it doesn't work. Screen exits without creating the detached
> > > screen.
> >
> > screen -dm isn't the same as screen -d -m. Try the latter.
>
> Just an FYI...
>
> You *may* be right, however...
>
> "Standards" dictate that "flags" can be combined into a single
> parameter. This is "eased" (debatable IMO) by the "getopts" function in
> bash, getopt(1) command and getopt(3) function call for C et al.

You are right to the extent that posix getopt does indeed allow "-dn" as
equivalent to "-d -n". But, _lots_ of programs use their own option parsing
so assuming the above would be very foolish.

> Unfortunately, *some* few programs do not implement this correctly.

That I belive is a major understatement...

/Peter
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos