Xref: utzoo comp.unix.wizards:18586 comp.sys.hp:3107 comp.lang.c:22627
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.sys.hp,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Job Control (a la csh/ksh) from within C
Message-ID: <11237@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 7 Oct 89 00:44:07 GMT
References: <1989Oct6.164830.5856@utzoo.uucp> <1719@zen.co.uk> <1989Oct3.153120.4750@utzoo.uucp> <320@sopwith.UUCP> <10041@venera.isi.edu>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 16

In article <10041@venera.isi.edu> raveling@isi.edu (Paul Raveling) writes:
>	There've been a number of decent-to-good examples of
>	this sort of facility, but I haven't seen one yet in
>	a Unix system.

The /proc filesystem and associated ioctls has existed for quite some
time.  You should be seeing more commercial UNIX implementations with
such facilities.  (Silicon Graphics has been shipping one for over a
year now.)

>	P.S.:  It's easier to implement good process/job control
>	if you slip a more capable kernel underneath Unix instead
>	of building a kludge over it.

This is a false dichotomy.  The UNIX kernel can be reengineered to
properly handle such things, and in fact it has been.