From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 08:19:04 -0600
From: ron minnich <rminnich@lanl.gov>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] qunlock
In-Reply-To: <29dbd0842758b89af800a214a30c9fac@vitanuova.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406220818520.24696-100000@maxroach.lanl.gov>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Topicbox-Message-UUID: aa135aee-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, C H Forsyth wrote:

> actually, i'd have said such an effect was unusable (or relying on it
> was pointless) in general, at least with more than one process, so i'm
> now more curious how you'd use it.


to me qunlock of an unlock'ed thing should be a cause for panic.

ron