Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

5
  • Thanks, do you mind if I submit a patch to clarify the manpage? Commented Oct 10, 2019 at 5:07
  • That would be great. The earliest system I've tested this on was RedHat 5.1 (Linux 2.0.34) of 21 years go. I don't know if earlier versions really did work as suggested by that manpage. Commented Oct 10, 2019 at 8:14
  • I don’t think the manpage has ever been right, the tty code has handled TTIOCNOTTY in a generic manner since forever. Commented Oct 10, 2019 at 8:15
  • I might be totally off here but is this similar to when you use & to put a command to bg and it can still write to terminal? Commented Apr 11, 2020 at 12:46
  • 1
    @d9ngle The situation is different. The commands started with & (either real background jobs, or background-lite as from scripts, shells without job control, etc) are still "attached to" the controlling terminal, they're not even pretending to detach from it. Commented Apr 11, 2020 at 23:19