Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: SVR3.0 vs BSD4.3
Message-ID: <7542@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: 24 Mar 88 20:18:33 GMT
References: <12414@brl-adm.ARPA> <4361@megaron.arizona.edu> <7499@brl-smoke.ARPA> <7514@brl-smoke.ARPA> <2050@munnari.oz>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 19

In article <2050@munnari.oz> kre@munnari.oz (Robert Elz) writes:
>But that's not job control.  Job control is when I notice that /foobar
>is 98% full, and some cretin has a job running that's half way through
>extracting 160Mb from a tar tape .. "kill -STOP <pid>" is job control.

Most 4BSD job control seems to be done by typing ^Z, "fg", "bg", etc.
Running under "shl", there is a keyboard-generated signal similar to
TSTP and analogs of fg, bg, etc.  That is why I said that "shl" is
the AT&T UNIX equivalent of 4BSD job control.  As both of us have
said, each approach has advantages and disadvantages w.r.t. the other.

>(after all, directories are just files, in both systems).

This isn't really true.  The kernel's file-system code knows how to
deal with specific directory formats.  Similarly for NFS directory access.

>This is so much drivel its not even worth commenting on.

A refutation of my argument against #! would have been useful.