Xref: utzoo comp.windows.x:23983 comp.unix.questions:23527
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!smsc.sony.com!dce
From: dce@smsc.sony.com (David Elliott)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x,comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: Process priorities and X
Message-ID: <1990Jul4.160042.562@smsc.sony.com>
Date: 4 Jul 90 16:00:42 GMT
References: <9007031747.AA05025@stc06.CTD.ORNL.GOV> <1990Jul4.061431.12129@servalan.uucp>
Reply-To: dce@Sony.COM (David Elliott)
Organization: Sony Microsystems Corp.
Lines: 25

In article <1990Jul4.061431.12129@servalan.uucp> rmtodd@servalan.uucp (Richard Todd) writes:
>  Is said user, by any chance, using twm?  I'm running X11R4 with twm on a
>Mac IIx, and I've noticed that clients that are started from twm (by some
>twm menu action) are niced down by 4, and clients that are started by hand
>run at normal niceness.  

This makes sense.  All twm does is to system() the command to be
executed, so it is subject to the same rules as any command executed
by /bin/sh.

In System V.2 and better versions of sh, the default is to automatically
nice down (by 4) all processes started in the background.

In other words, it probably isn't twm starting the processes at a
lower priority, but the shell.  If you have source for sh, you can
recompile it to not nice down background jobs.  Another option is
to write your own "background" command that runs, using the shell,
the command[s] you need in the background (by forking and redirecting
the process itself, instead of giving a & to the shell).
as arguments 
-- 
David Elliott
dce@smsc.sony.com | ...!{uunet,mips}!sonyusa!dce
(408)944-4073
"If I had a hat the size of Oklahoma, I'd be a happy person."