Answer A: bg puts existing running processes in the background; while "& disown" sends the process to the bg upon execution which is what the question is implying. "...execute those services and continue deploying other microservices within the same terminal section? gedit - has nothing to do with the question or answer it's just the command used in the answer (bad choice); imagine answer A as: job name & disown

D. bg %1 job name: This command puts the job associated with job ID %1 in the background and allows the technician to continue deploying other microservices in the same terminal session. The job name argument is optional and allows the technician to specify a custom name for the job. This option is suitable for the scenario described in the question. A. gedit & disown: This command opens the gedit text editor in the background and disowns it so that it is no longer associated with the terminal. This option is not relevant to deploying microservices and would not allow the technician to continue deploying other microservices in the same terminal session.

D. bg %1 job name The command bg %1 job name will allow the technician to execute the microservice in the background, allowing them to continue deploying other microservices within the same terminal session. The bg command stands for "background" and it is used to run a job in the background. The %1 is a job specifier, which specifies the job to be run in the background, and "job name" is the name given to the job. This allows the technician to keep the microservice running even after they have closed the terminal session.

Answer D is the closest. A doesnt make any sense as what gedit will help in all this.

D is the only one that makes the most sense. "bg %n" where n is the job ID, will send that job to process in the background, and all interaction with the current shell.

Scroll down to #5: https://www.baeldung.com/linux/detach-process-from-terminal

put the jobs in the background process!