Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site omsvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!intelca!omsvax!P L Barrett From: P L Barrett@omsvax.UUCP (Donna Loveland) Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: V.2 Job Control Message-ID: <794@omsvax.UUCP> Date: Tue, 31-Jan-84 11:16:16 EST Article-I.D.: omsvax.794 Posted: Tue Jan 31 11:16:16 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 7-Feb-84 08:25:08 EST Sender: plb@omsvax.UUCP Organization: Intel Corp, Hillsboro, OR Lines: 34 Well, a week or so has passed since UNIFORM (actually 11 days) and as yet I've seen nothing about the new V.2 job control stuff. Considering the reaction to the USENIX (oops, UNIFORM) talk on the subject I thought the net would be crackling with flames. (An aside, was I halucinating or were people REALLY booing the presenter?) Anyway, my questions: 1) It looks like I'd have to decide in ADVANCE if I'm going to use job control. Is this true? Tell me I'm wrong. (All I have to go on is the talk and a document that got passed around here.) 2) Does the 'controlled' process (ie the one being 'suspended') block on standard I/O or immediatly? I suspect it actually writes to the virtual terminal and blocks when a c-list some where fills up. 3) You can't signal a process to tell it to 'repaint' the screen with the V.2 JC stuff. Is there anyway to get around that? 4) The presenter (cant remember who) made the comment that the Berkeley JC had severe problems with its definition. I've never loved the implementation but isn't the problem in the implementation rather than the definition? 5) The comment was made (by the presenter) that his JC stuff is a poor mans BLIT. Why then is it called job control when it is more a primitive window manager (complete with virtual ttys!!)? Oh well, enough questions, I'm sure right now some one is honing up their axe.