seperate the command language and interactive she

[Thomas Bellman]

jmason at gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Jamie Mason) writes:
> In article <585 at lysator.liu.se> bellman at lysator.liu.se (Thomas Bellman) writes:
>> I think this would be good.  The proper way to do it, would be to have
>> a smarter cooked mode AND let the user load his own cooked mode
>> library.  To do this in current Unices I think would be difficult.

> 	Oh.  OUCH!  Yeah, we will have Tcsh or BASH (!) type stuff in the
> cooked mode.  TTY aliases.  I can just see an IOCTL to do it!  And
> linking your own cooked mode driver into the Kernel?  I imagine it could
> come in with a STREAMS module Push.  And users could load THEIR OWN CODE
> INTO THE KERNEL to do it!  Ouch!  Uuuggghhh!

Hmm, well, I didn't *mean* that they should load it into the kernel.
Definitely not.  Sorry if I gave that impression.  Things should get
out of the kernel.  The current cooked mode doesn't belong in the
kernel either (imho).

> 	Yes, I think it isa good idea, but I think it should be done by a
> USER LEVEL process.  Either the controlling process on a PTY, or
> somehting like the emacs shell window.

I think we want the same thing.  I'm not very well acquainted with
SysV, but from what I've heard about it, the streams concept seems to
be rather nice, if they haden't had that stupid restriction that
everything you push onto a stream must be in the kernel.  If you could
push an arbitrary process on top of it, it would be much better.


--
Thomas Bellman,  Lysator Computer Club   !  "Make Love - Nicht Wahr"
          Linkoping University, Sweden   !  "Too much of a good thing is
e-mail:         Bellman at Lysator.LiU.Se   !   WONDERFUL."     -- Mae West