From: mike scott on
mike scott wrote:
> I thought using daemon mode would be a simple change, but not so. In
> spite of the session name options, all the daemon processes seem to
> refer to just the one session.

Belay that last query!

After poking around a bit more in obscure corners on the 'net, it seems
that the session name doesn't do what I thought. In fact the whole
operation seems rather irrational.

AFAICT, the session name is just there to be pretty, and appears in the
status output. When creating daemon processes, id numbers are generated
internally and sequentially; they're not told to the user and don't
appear in the status output, yet this is the number needed to give to
the -n option when controlling the demon. (-n appears to be ignored when
starting with --daemon)

Does that seem correct, even if unreasonable?

Mike Scott (unet2 <at> [deletethis]
Harlow Essex England