UNIX for Advanced & Expert Users

Hi,
on AIX 6.1

Will this work :

Code:

mycommande &

Or it should be :

Code:

nohup mycommande &

It seems that

nohup mycommande &

is faster than :

Code:

mycommande

Thanks.

Code:

nohup mycomande&

Will appear faster as it disconnects from your session and sends all output to nhup.out (by default). The program will not run any faster, however as it is disconnected from your session you can log out and the program will continue to run.

needs a space between & and everything else and you usually redirect output if there is any

Code:

nohup command -o option > ./somefile  &

The correct choice depends on whether or not you want to modify mycommande's signal mask to ignore SIGHUP. Usually that decision is predicated on whether or not a process needs to survive a disconnection/logout. If it does, then use nohup. If not, then don't.

While it's definitely good style to use that whitespace, it's not required. When not part of a redirection operation (such as dup2'ing descriptors, 2>&1), syntactically, an unescaped ampersand is in the same category as an unescaped semicolon: separator_op.

Regards,
Alister

Thanks to all.
I an it. And it is running. A nohup.out file appeared. After end of operation will this file stay until I remove it ?

I need to verify something before remove it.

Thank you.

Yes, the nohup.out file will stay until you remove it.