Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.7.0.10 $; site ccvaxa
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!aglew
From: aglew@ccvaxa.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Wanted: pty driver for sysV
Message-ID: <2000039@ccvaxa>
Date: Tue, 15-Apr-86 16:37:00 EST
Article-I.D.: ccvaxa.2000039
Posted: Tue Apr 15 16:37:00 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 17-Apr-86 04:21:06 EST
References: <166@ms.UUCP>
Lines: 18
Nf-ID: #R:ms.UUCP:166:ccvaxa:2000039:000:881
Nf-From: ccvaxa.UUCP!aglew    Apr 15 15:37:00 1986


/* Written  1:15 pm  Apr 11, 1986 by friesen@psivax.UUCP */
>	This implementation would violate the spirit of UNIX systems.
>No process should be placed in a new state from outside, a signal
>*should* be sent, just in case the process needs to do some sort of
>clean-up before suspending. Other than insisting on a signal though, I
>agree that this aproach is nice. But only if it will work on *any*
>terminal, not just bitmapped terminals!

Why shouldn't processes be put in a new state from outside?
Why shouldn't the user be able to stop them, renice them, and do
all sorts of schtroumpfing about with them, without having to 
set up his signal handlers to do it first?

(This may be a plea for more intelligent default signal handlers).

Andy "Krazy" Glew. Gould CSD-Urbana.    USEnet:  ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!aglew
1101 E. University, Urbana, IL 61801    ARPAnet: aglew@gswd-vms