Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site watmath.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!idallen
From: idallen@watmath.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.bugs.4bsd
Subject: Re: CSH -- stopping job in SOURCE'd file
Message-ID: <9899@watmath.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 17-Nov-84 19:48:05 EST
Article-I.D.: watmath.9899
Posted: Sat Nov 17 19:48:05 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 18-Nov-84 04:37:41 EST
References: <286@hwcs.UUCP> <9821@watmath.UUCP>, <5814@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 21

> From ron@brl-tgr.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) Thu Nov 15 20:06:27 1984
> > Not only will C be thrown away if you stop B in the following:
> > 
> >     a ; b ; c
> > 
> > ...but if you stop a job executing from in a SOURCE'd file, the rest
> > of the file gets thrown away too.  This can be really annoying if
> > you read your mail or news in your .login, and stop either...
> >         -IAN!  (Ian! D. Allen)      University of Waterloo
> It is totally understandable that this happens.  If you think about it,
> it has to.  Berkeley Job control doesn't provide for the switching of
> input streams.
> If you need a method of thinking about it, just remember that shell
> input is dealt with upon a stop as if an "interrupt" had occured.

It doesn't have to.  I fixed it.  Stopping a job in a SOURCE'd file
just stops the job.  The shell continues with the next command in the
file.  My fix also means " a ; b ; c " behaves as documented; stopping
process B lets process C start.
-- 
        -IAN!  (Ian! D. Allen)      University of Waterloo