[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2007/01/15]
Peter da Silva wrote: >> Would configuring screen to store this file on rostov instead of my >> home directory help matters (make the listing of dead screens correct, >> make screen -wipe work, make the life of my screen sessions longer in >> case my machine crashes)? > > > Oh, fuck yes. That's the problem. Don't EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER stick > any local-session-state information on anything but a local drive. The > default for screen is "/tmp", and if "/tmp" is NFS-mounted then odds are > good you're going to take it up the rear entry somewhere or other > anyway. NFS is a source of so much hate even if you're just sticking > plain files on it. Named pipes ... crikey. > > If for some reason you're running a screen session on a dickless > workstation ... oh, christ ... just don't. Just ... don't ... > Oh no, in fact one of the reasons I find these servers appealing is for their quite large, um, disks. And /tmp is not NFS-mounted - that is a violation of the international law. So I guess I'll set $SCREENDIR to /tmp and see what happens. As to generic screen hate, I strongly prefer xterm as my terminal, in particular because of the history you get with Shift + Page Up. And no, I don't like to use script to get a log file full of escape sequences to grep through. But a bad terminal is better than a dead terminal. And detached screen sessions have the huge benefit of /not/ changing the window title when brain-crippled tcsh snippets running somewhere down the guts of something try to do so. So you can run a lot of processes on a lot of machines without the KDE icons flickering all the time. So overall, screen is a big win.There's stuff above here
Generated at 13:01 on 17 Jan 2007 by mariachi 0.52