Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!msuinfo!convex.cl.msu.edu!jap
From: jap@convex.cl.msu.edu (Joe Porkka)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Subject: Re: How do we change the scheduler?
Message-ID: <1991Jan16.191218.17437@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>
Date: 16 Jan 91 19:12:18 GMT
References: <MWM.91Jan9173914@raven.relay.pa.dec.com> <1991Jan10.130741.11570@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <BURLEY.91Jan10111657@geech.ai.mit.edu> <1991Jan12.175908.6479@Latour.Sandelman.OCUnix.On.Ca> <dillon.9252@overload.Berkeley.CA.US>
Sender: news@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu
Organization: Michigan State University
Lines: 18

dillon@overload.Berkeley.CA.US (Matthew Dillon) writes:

>In article <1991Jan12.175908.6479@Latour.Sandelman.OCUnix.On.Ca> mcr@Latour.Sandelman.OCUnix.On.Ca (Michael Richardson) writes:
>>
>>  Does 2.0 make sending DOS packets, and doing asynch dos I/O any
>>easier? Can one abort a DOS request? Thought not...

>    I do not think it made it, though it is simple to do.  The basic
>    problem is that the multi-packets-pending problem was never fixed.
>    DOS still expects the packet is sends synchronously to be the FIRST
>    one returned to the message port.  Thus, you cannot have multiple
>    packets pending because only one of them will be 'first' replying

Yes, you can. Sort of. When you send a DosPacket (by hand, not
thru dos.library) you can supply a different replyport than your
Processid msgport. Then you can mix async and sync with no problem.

I dont know how to abort an IO though. Matt do you know?