Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ut-sally.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!dual!mordor!ut-sally!std-unix
From: std-unix@ut-sally.UUCP (Moderator, John Quarterman)
Newsgroups: mod.std.unix
Subject: A final comment on P1003 Draft 6; V4N16
Message-ID: <3790@ut-sally.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 12-Dec-85 21:33:34 EST
Article-I.D.: ut-sally.3790
Posted: Thu Dec 12 21:33:34 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 13-Dec-85 19:57:35 EST
Organization: IEEE/P1003 Portable Operating System Environment Committee
Lines: 23
Approved: jsq@sally.UUCP

Date: Thu, 12 Dec 85 13:25:12 EST
From: Arnold Robbins <arnold%gatech.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>

Just a final note on the P1003 Draft. I am dismayed by the lack of any IPC
mechanism other than pipes and signals. While the draft explicitly says that
one should not use signals for interprocess communication, it is well known
that pipes and signals are not enough for the "real world".

I realize that the System V IPC mechanisms are usually considered
non-orthogonal and difficult to learn, and BSD sockets don't seem to be
general enough either.  But something should be done. It is hard to
both innovate and standardize at the same time, but some sort of IPC
should be added.

If this is an issue that has been purposely delayed, OK. As long as the
committee will acknowledge it as an issue, and eventually address it, I
won't say anything else.

[ You forgot FIFOs.  It's an acknowledged issue, yes.  -mod ]

I hope my comments have been useful.

Volume-Number: Volume 4, Number 16