Are processes within screen treated differently from foreground processes? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InHow can I see what processes are running?How do you detach the 2nd screen from within another screen?How are the processes in UNIX numbered?UNIX- Identify which processes are running more that 6hoursWhy there are two sequential screen processes?Send commands to screen within screenLeft and right square brackets treated differently by sed/bashWhy kernel threads are treated as processesWhat is background and Foreground processes in JobsReplace screen process from within screen

Can a rogue use sneak attack with weapons that have the thrown property even if they are not thrown?

How to notate time signature switching consistently every measure

What does Linus Torvalds mean when he says that Git "never ever" tracks a file?

Aging parents with no investments

Can one be advised by a professor who is very far away?

What do hard-Brexiteers want with respect to the Irish border?

Why was M87 targetted for the Event Horizon Telescope instead of Sagittarius A*?

If a Druid sees an animal’s corpse, can they Wild Shape into that animal?

Falsification in Math vs Science

What do the Banks children have against barley water?

slides for 30min~1hr skype tenure track application interview

How to support a colleague who finds meetings extremely tiring?

Did Scotland spend $250,000 for the slogan "Welcome to Scotland"?

Shouldn't "much" here be used instead of "more"?

One word riddle: Vowel in the middle

Why is the maximum length of OpenWrt’s root password 8 characters?

Is a "Democratic" Oligarchy-Style System Possible?

Are there incongruent pythagorean triangles with the same perimeter and same area?

Can you compress metal and what would be the consequences?

How can I autofill dates in Excel excluding Sunday?

Time travel alters history but people keep saying nothing's changed

Delete all lines which don't have n characters before delimiter

What tool would a Roman-age civilization have for the breaking of silver and other metals into dust?

Geography at the pixel level



Are processes within screen treated differently from foreground processes?



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InHow can I see what processes are running?How do you detach the 2nd screen from within another screen?How are the processes in UNIX numbered?UNIX- Identify which processes are running more that 6hoursWhy there are two sequential screen processes?Send commands to screen within screenLeft and right square brackets treated differently by sed/bashWhy kernel threads are treated as processesWhat is background and Foreground processes in JobsReplace screen process from within screen



.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








0















Assume I have a long running process, long_running_proc with a single TCP connection to host host.example.com.



Is that process treated differently, by the OS or the shell, when it's run as a foreground process vs background or behind screen?



For instance:



~ long_running_proc --connect host.example.com
...


vs.



~ screen
~ long_running_proc --connect host.example.com
[ctrl-a] + d
~


vs.



~ long_running_proc --connect host.example.com &
[1] 67539
~


Are there different rules to process interruptions or context switches? Do they have a lower priority? Would I be more likely to get a TCP timeout with a screened/background process?










share|improve this question







New contributor




JonLuca is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.


























    0















    Assume I have a long running process, long_running_proc with a single TCP connection to host host.example.com.



    Is that process treated differently, by the OS or the shell, when it's run as a foreground process vs background or behind screen?



    For instance:



    ~ long_running_proc --connect host.example.com
    ...


    vs.



    ~ screen
    ~ long_running_proc --connect host.example.com
    [ctrl-a] + d
    ~


    vs.



    ~ long_running_proc --connect host.example.com &
    [1] 67539
    ~


    Are there different rules to process interruptions or context switches? Do they have a lower priority? Would I be more likely to get a TCP timeout with a screened/background process?










    share|improve this question







    New contributor




    JonLuca is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






















      0












      0








      0








      Assume I have a long running process, long_running_proc with a single TCP connection to host host.example.com.



      Is that process treated differently, by the OS or the shell, when it's run as a foreground process vs background or behind screen?



      For instance:



      ~ long_running_proc --connect host.example.com
      ...


      vs.



      ~ screen
      ~ long_running_proc --connect host.example.com
      [ctrl-a] + d
      ~


      vs.



      ~ long_running_proc --connect host.example.com &
      [1] 67539
      ~


      Are there different rules to process interruptions or context switches? Do they have a lower priority? Would I be more likely to get a TCP timeout with a screened/background process?










      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      JonLuca is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.












      Assume I have a long running process, long_running_proc with a single TCP connection to host host.example.com.



      Is that process treated differently, by the OS or the shell, when it's run as a foreground process vs background or behind screen?



      For instance:



      ~ long_running_proc --connect host.example.com
      ...


      vs.



      ~ screen
      ~ long_running_proc --connect host.example.com
      [ctrl-a] + d
      ~


      vs.



      ~ long_running_proc --connect host.example.com &
      [1] 67539
      ~


      Are there different rules to process interruptions or context switches? Do they have a lower priority? Would I be more likely to get a TCP timeout with a screened/background process?







      shell process gnu-screen background-process process-management






      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      JonLuca is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      JonLuca is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question






      New contributor




      JonLuca is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 2 days ago









      JonLucaJonLuca

      1034




      1034




      New contributor




      JonLuca is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      JonLuca is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      JonLuca is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2














          In general, by default the only difference is that it would receive a SIGTTIN (or SIGTTOU) signal if it tried to read (or write) the tty while being in the background.



          Other differences as to priorities or higher context switches depend on your shell (or screen) if it willingly does anything of that sort, such as changing the process’s “nice” number or maybe binding it to one particular CPU and if that CPU happens to be interrupted a lot. Normally shells don't do anything of this sort unless requested.



          Higher probability of getting TCP timeouts might be related to whether your process does get stopped by one of the above signals (due to attempted tty access), in which case it wouldn’t have any chance to receive and therefore reply to network traffic.



          If you think of it, daemon processes are the most “background” processes possible, and they certainly aren’t second-class processes.



          I can’t be exact about specifically screen’s detach operation but its documentation says that detached processes continue running, and that screen detaches itself from the process's tty, so the process goes on basically with no difference as to normal foreground or background operation. You would have difficulties at giving it commands, though, being your interactive terminal detached from the process's virtual terminal. This might not be good for your process if at some point it expects input from its terminal.






          share|improve this answer

























          • This is exactly what I was wondering. Thanks for the detailed response! I suppose it'll become somewhat process dependent at that point.

            – JonLuca
            2 days ago






          • 1





            I believe in the case of screen a pseudo tty is used. When screen is detached the tty still exists and is still the controlling terminal of the process executed in screen.

            – Torin
            2 days ago











          • @Torin @JonLuca True, thank you. I never use screen and had misunderstood its docs: I thought screen detaches the process but in fact it detaches itself from the process’s pty, so yes the process is still fully connected and controlled by that pty. Answer updated.

            – LL3
            2 days ago












          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "106"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );






          JonLuca is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f511323%2fare-processes-within-screen-treated-differently-from-foreground-processes%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          2














          In general, by default the only difference is that it would receive a SIGTTIN (or SIGTTOU) signal if it tried to read (or write) the tty while being in the background.



          Other differences as to priorities or higher context switches depend on your shell (or screen) if it willingly does anything of that sort, such as changing the process’s “nice” number or maybe binding it to one particular CPU and if that CPU happens to be interrupted a lot. Normally shells don't do anything of this sort unless requested.



          Higher probability of getting TCP timeouts might be related to whether your process does get stopped by one of the above signals (due to attempted tty access), in which case it wouldn’t have any chance to receive and therefore reply to network traffic.



          If you think of it, daemon processes are the most “background” processes possible, and they certainly aren’t second-class processes.



          I can’t be exact about specifically screen’s detach operation but its documentation says that detached processes continue running, and that screen detaches itself from the process's tty, so the process goes on basically with no difference as to normal foreground or background operation. You would have difficulties at giving it commands, though, being your interactive terminal detached from the process's virtual terminal. This might not be good for your process if at some point it expects input from its terminal.






          share|improve this answer

























          • This is exactly what I was wondering. Thanks for the detailed response! I suppose it'll become somewhat process dependent at that point.

            – JonLuca
            2 days ago






          • 1





            I believe in the case of screen a pseudo tty is used. When screen is detached the tty still exists and is still the controlling terminal of the process executed in screen.

            – Torin
            2 days ago











          • @Torin @JonLuca True, thank you. I never use screen and had misunderstood its docs: I thought screen detaches the process but in fact it detaches itself from the process’s pty, so yes the process is still fully connected and controlled by that pty. Answer updated.

            – LL3
            2 days ago
















          2














          In general, by default the only difference is that it would receive a SIGTTIN (or SIGTTOU) signal if it tried to read (or write) the tty while being in the background.



          Other differences as to priorities or higher context switches depend on your shell (or screen) if it willingly does anything of that sort, such as changing the process’s “nice” number or maybe binding it to one particular CPU and if that CPU happens to be interrupted a lot. Normally shells don't do anything of this sort unless requested.



          Higher probability of getting TCP timeouts might be related to whether your process does get stopped by one of the above signals (due to attempted tty access), in which case it wouldn’t have any chance to receive and therefore reply to network traffic.



          If you think of it, daemon processes are the most “background” processes possible, and they certainly aren’t second-class processes.



          I can’t be exact about specifically screen’s detach operation but its documentation says that detached processes continue running, and that screen detaches itself from the process's tty, so the process goes on basically with no difference as to normal foreground or background operation. You would have difficulties at giving it commands, though, being your interactive terminal detached from the process's virtual terminal. This might not be good for your process if at some point it expects input from its terminal.






          share|improve this answer

























          • This is exactly what I was wondering. Thanks for the detailed response! I suppose it'll become somewhat process dependent at that point.

            – JonLuca
            2 days ago






          • 1





            I believe in the case of screen a pseudo tty is used. When screen is detached the tty still exists and is still the controlling terminal of the process executed in screen.

            – Torin
            2 days ago











          • @Torin @JonLuca True, thank you. I never use screen and had misunderstood its docs: I thought screen detaches the process but in fact it detaches itself from the process’s pty, so yes the process is still fully connected and controlled by that pty. Answer updated.

            – LL3
            2 days ago














          2












          2








          2







          In general, by default the only difference is that it would receive a SIGTTIN (or SIGTTOU) signal if it tried to read (or write) the tty while being in the background.



          Other differences as to priorities or higher context switches depend on your shell (or screen) if it willingly does anything of that sort, such as changing the process’s “nice” number or maybe binding it to one particular CPU and if that CPU happens to be interrupted a lot. Normally shells don't do anything of this sort unless requested.



          Higher probability of getting TCP timeouts might be related to whether your process does get stopped by one of the above signals (due to attempted tty access), in which case it wouldn’t have any chance to receive and therefore reply to network traffic.



          If you think of it, daemon processes are the most “background” processes possible, and they certainly aren’t second-class processes.



          I can’t be exact about specifically screen’s detach operation but its documentation says that detached processes continue running, and that screen detaches itself from the process's tty, so the process goes on basically with no difference as to normal foreground or background operation. You would have difficulties at giving it commands, though, being your interactive terminal detached from the process's virtual terminal. This might not be good for your process if at some point it expects input from its terminal.






          share|improve this answer















          In general, by default the only difference is that it would receive a SIGTTIN (or SIGTTOU) signal if it tried to read (or write) the tty while being in the background.



          Other differences as to priorities or higher context switches depend on your shell (or screen) if it willingly does anything of that sort, such as changing the process’s “nice” number or maybe binding it to one particular CPU and if that CPU happens to be interrupted a lot. Normally shells don't do anything of this sort unless requested.



          Higher probability of getting TCP timeouts might be related to whether your process does get stopped by one of the above signals (due to attempted tty access), in which case it wouldn’t have any chance to receive and therefore reply to network traffic.



          If you think of it, daemon processes are the most “background” processes possible, and they certainly aren’t second-class processes.



          I can’t be exact about specifically screen’s detach operation but its documentation says that detached processes continue running, and that screen detaches itself from the process's tty, so the process goes on basically with no difference as to normal foreground or background operation. You would have difficulties at giving it commands, though, being your interactive terminal detached from the process's virtual terminal. This might not be good for your process if at some point it expects input from its terminal.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 2 days ago

























          answered 2 days ago









          LL3LL3

          1,2099




          1,2099












          • This is exactly what I was wondering. Thanks for the detailed response! I suppose it'll become somewhat process dependent at that point.

            – JonLuca
            2 days ago






          • 1





            I believe in the case of screen a pseudo tty is used. When screen is detached the tty still exists and is still the controlling terminal of the process executed in screen.

            – Torin
            2 days ago











          • @Torin @JonLuca True, thank you. I never use screen and had misunderstood its docs: I thought screen detaches the process but in fact it detaches itself from the process’s pty, so yes the process is still fully connected and controlled by that pty. Answer updated.

            – LL3
            2 days ago


















          • This is exactly what I was wondering. Thanks for the detailed response! I suppose it'll become somewhat process dependent at that point.

            – JonLuca
            2 days ago






          • 1





            I believe in the case of screen a pseudo tty is used. When screen is detached the tty still exists and is still the controlling terminal of the process executed in screen.

            – Torin
            2 days ago











          • @Torin @JonLuca True, thank you. I never use screen and had misunderstood its docs: I thought screen detaches the process but in fact it detaches itself from the process’s pty, so yes the process is still fully connected and controlled by that pty. Answer updated.

            – LL3
            2 days ago

















          This is exactly what I was wondering. Thanks for the detailed response! I suppose it'll become somewhat process dependent at that point.

          – JonLuca
          2 days ago





          This is exactly what I was wondering. Thanks for the detailed response! I suppose it'll become somewhat process dependent at that point.

          – JonLuca
          2 days ago




          1




          1





          I believe in the case of screen a pseudo tty is used. When screen is detached the tty still exists and is still the controlling terminal of the process executed in screen.

          – Torin
          2 days ago





          I believe in the case of screen a pseudo tty is used. When screen is detached the tty still exists and is still the controlling terminal of the process executed in screen.

          – Torin
          2 days ago













          @Torin @JonLuca True, thank you. I never use screen and had misunderstood its docs: I thought screen detaches the process but in fact it detaches itself from the process’s pty, so yes the process is still fully connected and controlled by that pty. Answer updated.

          – LL3
          2 days ago






          @Torin @JonLuca True, thank you. I never use screen and had misunderstood its docs: I thought screen detaches the process but in fact it detaches itself from the process’s pty, so yes the process is still fully connected and controlled by that pty. Answer updated.

          – LL3
          2 days ago











          JonLuca is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          JonLuca is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












          JonLuca is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











          JonLuca is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














          Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f511323%2fare-processes-within-screen-treated-differently-from-foreground-processes%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          -background-process, gnu-screen, process, process-management, shell

          Popular posts from this blog

          Mobil Contents History Mobil brands Former Mobil brands Lukoil transaction Mobil UK Mobil Australia Mobil New Zealand Mobil Greece Mobil in Japan Mobil in Canada Mobil Egypt See also References External links Navigation menuwww.mobil.com"Mobil Corporation"the original"Our Houston campus""Business & Finance: Socony-Vacuum Corp.""Popular Mechanics""Lubrite Technologies""Exxon Mobil campus 'clearly happening'""Toledo Blade - Google News Archive Search""The Lion and the Moose - How 2 Executives Pulled off the Biggest Merger Ever""ExxonMobil Press Release""Lubricants""Archived copy"the original"Mobil 1™ and Mobil Super™ motor oil and synthetic motor oil - Mobil™ Motor Oils""Mobil Delvac""Mobil Industrial website""The State of Competition in Gasoline Marketing: The Effects of Refiner Operations at Retail""Mobil Travel Guide to become Forbes Travel Guide""Hotel Rankings: Forbes Merges with Mobil"the original"Jamieson oil industry history""Mobil news""Caltex pumps for control""Watchdog blocks Caltex bid""Exxon Mobil sells service station network""Mobil Oil New Zealand Limited is New Zealand's oldest oil company, with predecessor companies having first established a presence in the country in 1896""ExxonMobil subsidiaries have a business history in New Zealand stretching back more than 120 years. We are involved in petroleum refining and distribution and the marketing of fuels, lubricants and chemical products""Archived copy"the original"Exxon Mobil to Sell Its Japanese Arm for $3.9 Billion""Gas station merger will end Esso and Mobil's long run in Japan""Esso moves to affiliate itself with PC Optimum, no longer Aeroplan, in loyalty point switch""Mobil brand of gas stations to launch in Canada after deal for 213 Loblaws-owned locations""Mobil Nears Completion of Rebranding 200 Loblaw Gas Stations""Learn about ExxonMobil's operations in Egypt""Petrol and Diesel Service Stations in Egypt - Mobil"Official websiteExxon Mobil corporate websiteMobil Industrial official websiteeeeeeeeDA04275022275790-40000 0001 0860 5061n82045453134887257134887257

          Frič See also Navigation menuinternal link

          Identify plant with long narrow paired leaves and reddish stems Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?What is this plant with long sharp leaves? Is it a weed?What is this 3ft high, stalky plant, with mid sized narrow leaves?What is this young shrub with opposite ovate, crenate leaves and reddish stems?What is this plant with large broad serrated leaves?Identify this upright branching weed with long leaves and reddish stemsPlease help me identify this bulbous plant with long, broad leaves and white flowersWhat is this small annual with narrow gray/green leaves and rust colored daisy-type flowers?What is this chilli plant?Does anyone know what type of chilli plant this is?Help identify this plant