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