Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!ut-sally!pyramid!decwrl!sun!guy
From: guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: RE: Re: vi & heavy loads
Message-ID: <5271@sun.uucp>
Date: Sat, 19-Jul-86 02:54:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.5271
Posted: Sat Jul 19 02:54:03 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 20-Jul-86 05:43:04 EDT
References: <2357@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 22

> Steps should be taken to prevent subshells spawned from vi from also running
> at -10 priority. Since we all used csh (why would anyone use the other shell
> [flames to /dev/null please])

Fine.  That statement was itself a flame; why wasn't it sent there?

> we just added 'nice 0' the our .cshrc files.
> 
> Paranoid types and sh users can diddle vi appropriately.

Since this "step" is voluntary, why "should" these steps be taken?  To be
"nice" (pun only partially intended)?  Sorry, but most administrators are
probably (to use your misapplied word) "paranoid".  Any admin who sets up
"vi" to run at -10 priority (Heaven help you if it goes into an infinite
loop, unless your shell is running at better than -10 priority when you type
"kill" at it), and doesn't *enforce* that it won't give this priority to
subshells, deserves to have the knowledgable users abuse the hell out of
such a facility.
-- 
	Guy Harris
	{ihnp4, decvax, seismo, decwrl, ...}!sun!guy
	guy@sun.com (or guy@sun.arpa)