Why gnome-terminal tells me “There is still a process running” while logged in as root?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
I'm using gnome on Debian Jessie. When I tried to close terminal after logged in as root, it told me like in the picture below.
What should I do to prevent this from happening again? Is it a bug??
Thanks for checking me out!!!
root gnome-terminal
edited Oct 18 '15 at 21:31
Thomas Dickey
53.9k5103176
asked Jul 15 '15 at 8:54
Nguyễn Quốc PhongNguyễn Quốc Phong
112
add a comment |
I'm using gnome on Debian Jessie. When I tried to close terminal after logged in as root, it told me like in the picture below.
What should I do to prevent this from happening again? Is it a bug??
Thanks for checking me out!!!
root gnome-terminal
edited Oct 18 '15 at 21:31
Thomas Dickey
53.9k5103176
asked Jul 15 '15 at 8:54
Nguyễn Quốc PhongNguyễn Quốc Phong
112
add a comment |
I'm using gnome on Debian Jessie. When I tried to close terminal after logged in as root, it told me like in the picture below.
What should I do to prevent this from happening again? Is it a bug??
Thanks for checking me out!!!
root gnome-terminal
edited Oct 18 '15 at 21:31
Thomas Dickey
53.9k5103176
asked Jul 15 '15 at 8:54
Nguyễn Quốc PhongNguyễn Quốc Phong
112
I'm using gnome on Debian Jessie. When I tried to close terminal after logged in as root, it told me like in the picture below.
What should I do to prevent this from happening again? Is it a bug??
Thanks for checking me out!!!
root gnome-terminal
root gnome-terminal
edited Oct 18 '15 at 21:31
Thomas Dickey
53.9k5103176
asked Jul 15 '15 at 8:54
Nguyễn Quốc PhongNguyễn Quốc Phong
112
edited Oct 18 '15 at 21:31
Thomas Dickey
53.9k5103176
asked Jul 15 '15 at 8:54
Nguyễn Quốc PhongNguyễn Quốc Phong
112
edited Oct 18 '15 at 21:31
Thomas Dickey
53.9k5103176
edited Oct 18 '15 at 21:31
Thomas Dickey
53.9k5103176
edited Oct 18 '15 at 21:31
Thomas Dickey
53.9k5103176
53.9k5103176
asked Jul 15 '15 at 8:54
Nguyễn Quốc PhongNguyễn Quốc Phong
112
asked Jul 15 '15 at 8:54
Nguyễn Quốc PhongNguyễn Quốc Phong
112
asked Jul 15 '15 at 8:54
Nguyễn Quốc PhongNguyễn Quốc Phong
112
112
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Well there are processess running in your terminal from before you became root -- sudo (or su) and two bash (one for root, one for your normal user)... as well as any background-jobs (started with & or put in the background) in either shell. It's a fair warning, and it's good if you're about to accidently close a terminal.
If you exit root first (which you ought to), you don't get the warning. Even better, if you also exit the shell for your normal user. Just closing the terminal not only risk killing some running proccess you've forgot about, it also prevents the shell (bash) from saving things like command-history.
answered Jul 15 '15 at 9:05
Baard KopperudBaard Kopperud
4,47842845
Your last sentence is wrong: closing the terminal sends SIGHUP to the shell, and that does make it save the history. If you don't get the warning, then I think there's no larger risk of killing background tasks than when exiting the shell, but I'm not sure, it's possible that the set of processes that receive SIGHUP is different in some corner cases.
– Gilles
Jul 15 '15 at 22:52
add a comment |
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
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f216113%2fwhy-gnome-terminal-tells-me-there-is-still-a-process-running-while-logged-in-a%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
Well there are processess running in your terminal from before you became root -- sudo (or su) and two bash (one for root, one for your normal user)... as well as any background-jobs (started with & or put in the background) in either shell. It's a fair warning, and it's good if you're about to accidently close a terminal.
If you exit root first (which you ought to), you don't get the warning. Even better, if you also exit the shell for your normal user. Just closing the terminal not only risk killing some running proccess you've forgot about, it also prevents the shell (bash) from saving things like command-history.
answered Jul 15 '15 at 9:05
Baard KopperudBaard Kopperud
4,47842845
Your last sentence is wrong: closing the terminal sends SIGHUP to the shell, and that does make it save the history. If you don't get the warning, then I think there's no larger risk of killing background tasks than when exiting the shell, but I'm not sure, it's possible that the set of processes that receive SIGHUP is different in some corner cases.
– Gilles
Jul 15 '15 at 22:52
add a comment |
Well there are processess running in your terminal from before you became root -- sudo (or su) and two bash (one for root, one for your normal user)... as well as any background-jobs (started with & or put in the background) in either shell. It's a fair warning, and it's good if you're about to accidently close a terminal.
If you exit root first (which you ought to), you don't get the warning. Even better, if you also exit the shell for your normal user. Just closing the terminal not only risk killing some running proccess you've forgot about, it also prevents the shell (bash) from saving things like command-history.
answered Jul 15 '15 at 9:05
Baard KopperudBaard Kopperud
4,47842845
Your last sentence is wrong: closing the terminal sends SIGHUP to the shell, and that does make it save the history. If you don't get the warning, then I think there's no larger risk of killing background tasks than when exiting the shell, but I'm not sure, it's possible that the set of processes that receive SIGHUP is different in some corner cases.
– Gilles
Jul 15 '15 at 22:52
add a comment |
Well there are processess running in your terminal from before you became root -- sudo (or su) and two bash (one for root, one for your normal user)... as well as any background-jobs (started with & or put in the background) in either shell. It's a fair warning, and it's good if you're about to accidently close a terminal.
If you exit root first (which you ought to), you don't get the warning. Even better, if you also exit the shell for your normal user. Just closing the terminal not only risk killing some running proccess you've forgot about, it also prevents the shell (bash) from saving things like command-history.
answered Jul 15 '15 at 9:05
Baard KopperudBaard Kopperud
4,47842845
Well there are processess running in your terminal from before you became root -- sudo (or su) and two bash (one for root, one for your normal user)... as well as any background-jobs (started with & or put in the background) in either shell. It's a fair warning, and it's good if you're about to accidently close a terminal.
If you exit root first (which you ought to), you don't get the warning. Even better, if you also exit the shell for your normal user. Just closing the terminal not only risk killing some running proccess you've forgot about, it also prevents the shell (bash) from saving things like command-history.
answered Jul 15 '15 at 9:05
Baard KopperudBaard Kopperud
4,47842845
answered Jul 15 '15 at 9:05
Baard KopperudBaard Kopperud
4,47842845
answered Jul 15 '15 at 9:05
Baard KopperudBaard Kopperud
4,47842845
answered Jul 15 '15 at 9:05
Baard KopperudBaard Kopperud
4,47842845
4,47842845
Your last sentence is wrong: closing the terminal sends SIGHUP to the shell, and that does make it save the history. If you don't get the warning, then I think there's no larger risk of killing background tasks than when exiting the shell, but I'm not sure, it's possible that the set of processes that receive SIGHUP is different in some corner cases.
– Gilles
Jul 15 '15 at 22:52
add a comment |
Your last sentence is wrong: closing the terminal sends SIGHUP to the shell, and that does make it save the history. If you don't get the warning, then I think there's no larger risk of killing background tasks than when exiting the shell, but I'm not sure, it's possible that the set of processes that receive SIGHUP is different in some corner cases.
– Gilles
Jul 15 '15 at 22:52
Your last sentence is wrong: closing the terminal sends SIGHUP to the shell, and that does make it save the history. If you don't get the warning, then I think there's no larger risk of killing background tasks than when exiting the shell, but I'm not sure, it's possible that the set of processes that receive SIGHUP is different in some corner cases.
– Gilles
Jul 15 '15 at 22:52
Your last sentence is wrong: closing the terminal sends SIGHUP to the shell, and that does make it save the history. If you don't get the warning, then I think there's no larger risk of killing background tasks than when exiting the shell, but I'm not sure, it's possible that the set of processes that receive SIGHUP is different in some corner cases.
– Gilles
Jul 15 '15 at 22:52
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f216113%2fwhy-gnome-terminal-tells-me-there-is-still-a-process-running-while-logged-in-a%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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