Re: attaching detached sessions to the current one

[johnsmailinglists]

A future version of screen will have a feature that will make screen  
itself slightly less obtrusive. It will not fix the issue of C-a a a  
a a [space], nor will it allow you to grab non-screen'd processes  
into screen, but it will make starting a new screen session  
(reattaching, actually) more reasonable: The -p option will be  
extended with a '+' option, which will spawn a new shell. So,  
one's .profile can end with screen -R -DD -p +, which will make sure  
that you always end up with a new shell to do whatever in, but at the  
same time leaving you with the safety of screen. One could even use  
some of the scripting techniques for screen (a primer was recently  
posted to the list) to manage nested screens reasonably well.

I'm currently working on a set of scripts to wrap and manage screen,  
but nested screen management is still in the TODO.

4.0.2 lacks this enhancement ("-p +"), but I'm told that the very  
next release (4.0.3?) will have it.


JP




On May 16, 2006, at 6:34 AM, Joe Zbiciak wrote:

> "Me too!"
>
>  Freaky thing is, this *may actually be possible*.
>
>  If screen develops the capability to import TTY FDs from another  
> process, then the answer may be as simple as a wrapper around your  
> shell that does little more than hold the FDs for your TTY, and  
> pipes them through.  (Well, it'd also need to do the right things  
> w/ signals, but let's not get caught up in details.)  You could  
> arrange for this to run from your login scripts (or  
> perhaps .cshrc/.bashrc if you're careful--it'd have to somehow  
> autodetect its or screen's presence to avoid recursion).  Such a  
> wrapper could be very, very lightweight, since it wouldn't even  
> need to do any terminal emulation, since it's not doing any  
> terminal multiplexing.  All it'd need to know how to do is  
> surrender its FDs over a UNIX domain socket when requested by  
> screen for the import.
>
>  If screen sprouts the aforementioned capability, can we get that  
> wrapper as a tool also?  I'd add it to my login scripts in a  
> heartbeat.  It'd be like "screen, ultra light."  So light weight  
> there's no excuse NOT to run it.
>
>  --Joe
>
> We sell Spatulas, and that's all!http://spatula-city.org/~im14u2c/
> http://sdk-1600.spatula-city.org/
> http://intyos.spatula-city.org/
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Dave Waxman <address@hidden>
> To: address@hidden
> Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 8:03:00 AM
> Subject: Re: attaching detached sessions to the current one
>
> On May 16 08:37, Aaron Davies wrote:
> > On 5/16/06, Michael Schroeder
> > A related feature I'd love to see implemented some day is the ability
> > to import a non-screen process into screen. For example, I might  
> > start
> > a compilation or a download in a normal shell, realize I have to go
> > somewhere, and want to detach it for later monitoring through screen,
> > but if I didn't have the forsight to start it in screen in the first
> > place, I can't do that now.
>
> I'd agree 100%.  This is the one thing I've been praying to see added
> for YEARS.  I always start the most important thing RIGHT before I
> realize I have to go ...
>
>
> --
> Dave Waxman
> address@hidden
> http://waxman.org/
>
> "Some Scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful,  
> is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say  
> there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic  
> building block of the universe." - Frank Zappa
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> screen-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/screen-users
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> screen-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/screen-users



--
<Beeth> Girls are like internet domain names, the ones I like are  
already
        taken.
 <honx> well, you can stil get one from a strange country :-P
                       -- geekissues.org quote #369