Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!amdahl!JUTS!kpc00 From: kpc00@ccc.amdahl.com (Kimball P Collins) Newsgroups: comp.emacs Subject: Re: "Suspending a program running in an X window is silly" Message-ID: <96AW02Cm01gU01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> Date: 30 Jun 90 04:16:39 GMT References: Reply-To: kpc00@JUTS.uts.amdahl.com (Kimball P Collins) Distribution: comp Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA Lines: 23 This reminds me. Does anybody else think that the version of ^Z that gets compiled on machines without job control (the inferior shell that uses the original terminal) is better than the version that gets compiled on machines with job control (the superior shell)? What is the advantage of the superior shell other than that one's .cshrc/$ENV file is not read and that non-exported items are available? One of the advantages of the inferior shell is that one starts out in the working directory of the current buffer, rather than the wd at the time that one called emacs. And, tangentially, has anybody else noticed that M-x shell is useless with ksh because of its raw-mode features? Are there hints on this? (P.S. I quickly tell the difference between an inferior shell and the superior shell because I have my prompts change for each invocation of a subshell. This helps to remind me that I am inside emacs and is an advantage of the inferior shell, along with knowing that I have a new, unadulterated shell.) -- Not representing Amdahl nor necessarily myself.