Re: [9fans] New /prog idea

[lucio@proxima.alt.za]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 360 bytes --]

It seems to me that this type of operation would be considerably more
successful if there was better interaction between the kernel and a
running program.  that is, if processes were engineered to accept
unsolicited signalling from the kernel and, consequently, from other
processes without being restricted to a narrow range of signals or
notes.

++L

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 7081 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 830 bytes --]

There was a proc box in the original Plan B of which there were different
version in the descendants (for files too) and
which permitted things similar to what you want. See

http://lsub.org/ls/export/man.1e.ps (page 31)
and
http://lsub.org/ls/export/ubiterm.icps05.pdf

Later, Andrey and Ron did something similar for clusters with xcpu:

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=04100349

G.



On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 11:59 PM, Oleksandr Iakovliev
<yshurik@lynxline.com>wrote:

>
> Just idea, but seriously, why cannot do something like this:
>
> # cat /prog/new > $id
> # cat /dis/ls.dis > /prog/$id/dis
> # echo "/" > /prog/$id/cwd
> # echo «Running» > /prog/$id/status
>
> Not to do it which echo/cat, but to have remote access to /prog/new
>



-- 
- curiosity sKilled the cat

[-- Attachment #2.1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1678 bytes --]