Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site abnjh.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!whuxle!spuxll!abnjh!usenet From: usenet@abnjh.UUCP (usenet) Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: Re: V.2 Job Control Message-ID: <440@abnjh.UUCP> Date: Thu, 2-Feb-84 11:30:35 EST Article-I.D.: abnjh.440 Posted: Thu Feb 2 11:30:35 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 8-Feb-84 01:44:33 EST References: <794@omsvax.UUCP> Organization: ATTIS, NJ Lines: 23 Personally, I think the most interesting thing about the sys Vr2 "Job Control" feature, is that it is not integrated with the Blit Support (separately priced) feature package. The result is that we now have two incompatible ways of accomplishing what amounts to the same thing. I talked to the presenter after the talk, and it seems that the implementors of the Job Control feature didn't even bother to go talk to the people doing Blit support. They just went off and did their own thing. Within the limitations of the terminal hardware, there is a lot of commonality between the functions needed to support a Blit and the code to provide Job Control. In the case of the Blit, a lot of the code actually resides in the Blit, in the case of the "dumb" terminal using Job Control, the code resides in the kernel, but there is no excuse for the user having to see the difference, as long as s/he sticks to a prescribed subset of functions. What do you-all think? Rick Thomas ihnp4!abnjh!usenet or ihnp4!abnji!rbt