Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!auspex!guy From: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris) Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards Subject: Re: ksh discriminates background processes Keywords: ksh, nice, errr... ugly Message-ID: <3426@auspex.auspex.com> Date: 4 Jun 90 16:40:54 GMT References: <1241@nyx.UUCP> Distribution: comp Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara Lines: 21 >every shell i have used in the last 13 years has lowered the priority of >background processes - makes sense to me But not to everybody. The problem with a shell doing so is that it's making an assumption that's not necessarily true, namely that a "background" process - i.e., a process initially started with an "&" - isn't an interactive process. This isn't necessarily true on: 1) systems with job control - the job may be moved into the foreground later; 2) systems with a window system - the job may be a terminal emulator, in which case you can run all sorts of interactive processes within the session it starts up. The original poster was being bit by 2); as he said, In particular, I like my xterm processes to be run at a high priority, not a low one. and frankly, I think most "xterm" users would agree with him.