Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uwm.edu!uwvax!tank!mimsy!chris
From: chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Job Control (a la csh/ksh) from within C
Message-ID: <20045@mimsy.UUCP>
Date: 7 Oct 89 15:38:39 GMT
References: <1719@zen.co.uk> <1989Oct3.153120.4750@utzoo.uucp> <320@sopwith.UUCP> <20040@mimsy.UUCP>
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742
Lines: 21

>>>... Job control is necessary even with a window system.
>>>Otherwise how does one stop a process without killing it?

>In article <1989Oct6.164830.5856@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer)
>answers:
>>One tells the system to suspend it [not necessarily via signals, etc.].
>... You've got other windows, remember ...

In article <20040@mimsy.UUCP> I wrote:
>How do I get the second window on my H19 here?

I should mention that I am not saying that signals, ^Z, etc., are *the
best* way to do job control, or even *the only* way, but I *am* saying
that, at least for now, they are better than ways that require windows.
(There are a whole series of things I think are wrong with the current
*and* the POSIX job control implementations.  For instance, process
groups should be allocated by the kernel, and it should be possible to
for a process to stop itself without sending itself a signal.)
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163)
Domain:	chris@cs.umd.edu	Path:	uunet!mimsy!chris