Article View: mod.std.unix
Article #404Re: Job Control
From: Moderator, John Quarterman
Date: Sun, 09 Nov 1986 02:02
Date: Sun, 09 Nov 1986 02:02
21 lines
1561 bytes
1561 bytes
From: ihnp4!iwtpu!katzung (Brian Katzung)
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 86 14:59:33 CST
I guess I'm being sort of lazy... I haven't even figured out the
relationship between "P1003" and "POSIX" (I got in late on the discussion),
[ IEEE P1003 is the committee; P1003.1 is the subcommittee that produced
the POSIX Trial Use Standard. -mod ]
but I wanted to point out one shortcoming of the 4.xBSD implementation of
job control so that it might be avoided in the future.
The wait3 system call has provisions for informing the parent when a
child is suspended, but not when it resumes. Thus, if an agent other than
the parent resumes the child, the parent doesn't know about it. This is
rare, but not unimaginable. I've had applications that could have been
enhanced if the mechanism were "balanced".
I haven't checked 4.3, but the 4.2 csh, in particular, won't send a
STOP or TSTP to a process that it believes is already stopped.
-- Brian Katzung ihnp4!{laidbak,iwtpu}!katzung
Volume-Number: Volume 8, Number 51
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<6306@ut-sally.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!std-unixShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!std-unix From: std-unix@ut-sally.UUCP (Moderator, John Quarterman) Newsgroups: mod.std.unix Subject: Re: Job Control Message-ID: <6306@ut-sally.UUCP> Date: Sat, 8-Nov-86 21:02:32 EST Article-I.D.: ut-sally.6306 Posted: Sat Nov 8 21:02:32 1986 Date-Received: Sun, 9-Nov-86 03:46:42 EST Organization: IEEE P1003 Portable Operating System for Computer Environments Committee Lines: 21 Approved: jsq@sally.utexas.edu