[comp.sys.att] multiple gettys, why use them?

bob@rush.cts.com (Bob Ames) (08/29/88)

> BTW, I found an alternative to multiple gettys for multiple logins. Login
> normally, get a new shell window (either full screen unix or windy),
> and then kill the parent. A new getty will be spawned, and you can get
> multiple logins that way (Although the last person to login will be the
> "current" user.)

Why all this talk of multiple gettys?  I've never used them.
What's wrong with 'Other Users' in the Office?  The only people
that I can think of who would want multiple gettys are those who don't
use 'Office' and therefore can't do 'Other Users'.  Although
those persons could always use 'su - user' to change users...  I'll bet that
this, accompanied by a 'windy -b' would give you multiple windows...

Maybe you don't like Office because you sometimes login from a remote
terminal.  You can check for the existance of $L0 in your .profile to
determine whether to go to the Office.  For example, when I want no UA,
I just login as:
Login: bob anything 
Password:
...
$ _
The part of my .profile that implements this looks like:
if [ -z "$L0" ]
then
        exec /usr/bin/ua
fi

So, why do you use multiple gettys?  If you don't use Office, I understand.
It seems that the *numerous* incompatibilities with multiple gettys (that
I've read about here) would make using them undesirable...

Bob Ames     
Howard Publications, Inc.   Bell: 208-733-0931   INET: bob@rush.cts.com
UUCP: {rutgers!ucsd, nosc, hplabs!hp-sdd}!crash!rush.cts.com!bob
                                       or crash!rush!bob might work...
"We've got Tribbles on the ship, Quintotritacale in the corridors,
and Klingons in the Quadrant!  It can ruin your whole day, Sir!"
- Scotty, "More Tribbles, More Troubles", animated.

"We each pay a fabulous price - for our visions of paradise." - Rush
---
Bob Ames     
Howard Publications, Inc.   Bell: 208-733-0931   INET: bob@rush.cts.com
UUCP: {rutgers!ucsd, nosc, hplabs!hp-sdd}!crash!rush.cts.com!bob
                                       or crash!rush!bob might work...
"We've got Tribbles on the ship, Quintotritacale in the corridors,
and Klingons in the Quadrant!  It can ruin your whole day, Sir!"
- Scotty, "More Tribbles, More Troubles", animated.

"We each pay a fabulous price - for our visions of paradise." - Rush

wsm@emory.uucp (William Mahavier) (08/30/88)

bob@rush.cts.com (Bob Ames) writes:

>Why all this talk of multiple gettys?  I've never used them.
>What's wrong with 'Other Users' in the Office?  The only people
>that I can think of who would want multiple gettys are those who don't
>use 'Office' and therefore can't do 'Other Users'.  Although

What is the talk about 'Other Users' in the Office?
I don't have such a choice in my office window. I
am running 3.51. Have I missed something? How do I
get an 'Other Users' choice? Thanks for any help.

W. S. Mahavier         | wsm@mathcs.emory.edu      DOMAIN 
Emory University       | {decvax,gatech}!emory!wsm UUCP
Dept of Math and CS    | wsm@emory                 BITNET
Atlanta, Ga 30322      | Office phone: 404-727-7585
-- 
W. S. Mahavier         | wsm@mathcs.emory.edu      DOMAIN 
Emory University       | {decvax,gatech}!emory!wsm UUCP
Dept of Math and CS    | wsm@emory                 BITNET
Atlanta, Ga 30322      | Office phone: 404-727-7585

darren@bacchus.UUCP (Darren Friedlein) (08/30/88)

In article <765@rush.cts.com> bob@rush.cts.com (Bob Ames) writes:
>Why all this talk of multiple gettys?  I've never used them.
>What's wrong with 'Other Users' in the Office?

I can't find 'Other Users' in UA.  Is this a feature not found in 3.5?

>                                                The only people
>that I can think of who would want multiple gettys are those who don't
>use 'Office' and therefore can't do 'Other Users'.

This is I.

>                                                    Although
>those persons could always use 'su - user' to change users...  I'll bet that
>this, accompanied by a 'windy -b' would give you multiple windows...

But why do this when you can use multiple gettys?  The most common use I have
for this is when a window I'm working on freezes.  Instead of reaching in the
closet and pulling out the ole' adm3a, I just pop into another window and
"kill".  Another use is previewing a file while working on another without
taking up screen space in your editor.  My favorite use it to log in to one
wondow, set font slot 0 to my moria font (220x70?), go into another window,
start playing moria and dump the map on the previous screen so I can see the
whole thing.  Rather obscure use, but it's nice...

>Maybe you don't like Office because you sometimes login from a remote
>terminal.

I don't like Office (UA) becuase the windows are big and clumsy, it takes up
lots of memory, slows the system to a screaching halt (I only have 1meg now),
and is in general a poor user interface.  [oh no, now I've done it, millions
of UA fans after me :-].

>---
>Bob Ames     
>Howard Publications, Inc.   Bell: 208-733-0931   INET: bob@rush.cts.com
>UUCP: {rutgers!ucsd, nosc, hplabs!hp-sdd}!crash!rush.cts.com!bob
>                                       or crash!rush!bob might work...

-darren
         ____
        /    \
       |                                 Rt 4, Box 416, Durham, NC 27703
  _____|_____     Darren G. Friedlein      data (bacchus) : 919/596-7746
 /     |     \                                      voice : 919/596-9492
(      |      )
 \____/    __/   {mcnc|icus|ditka|ethos|gladys|bakerst}!bacchus!darren

cjc@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com (Chris Calabrese[rs]) (08/30/88)

In article <3150@emory.uucp>, wsm@emory.uucp (William Mahavier) writes:
> What is the talk about 'Other Users' in the Office?

You can probably get this into your office by running "Preferences"
for Office, and toggling one of the options (I think it's called
Multi User Items: Y/N).
-- 
--------
	Christopher J. Calabrese
	AT&T Bell Laboratories
	ulysses!cjc

bob@rush.cts.com (Bob Ames) (08/31/88)

In article <3150@emory.uucp>, wsm@emory.uucp (William Mahavier) writes:
> bob@rush.cts.com (Bob Ames) writes:
> 
> >Why all this talk of multiple gettys?  I've never used them.
> >What's wrong with 'Other Users' in the Office?  The only people
> >that I can think of who would want multiple gettys are those who don't
> >use 'Office' and therefore can't do 'Other Users'.  Although
> 
> What is the talk about 'Other Users' in the Office?
> I don't have such a choice in my office window. I
> am running 3.51. Have I missed something? How do I
> get an 'Other Users' choice? Thanks for any help.

Go to Preferences, Office, and select 'Yes' to multi-user items.

Bob Ames     
Howard Publications, Inc.   Bell: 619-743-2546   INET: bob@rush.cts.com
UUCP: {rutgers!ucsd, nosc, hplabs!hp-sdd}!crash!rush.cts.com!bob
                                       or crash!rush!bob might work...
"We've got Tribbles on the ship, Quintotritacale in the corridors,
and Klingons in the Quadrant!  It can ruin your whole day, Sir!"
- Scotty, "More Tribbles, More Troubles", animated.

"We each pay a fabulous price - for our visions of paradise." - Rush

rlf@mtgzy.att.com (r.l.fletcher) (08/31/88)

In article <631@bacchus.UUCP>, darren@bacchus.UUCP (Darren Friedlein) writes:
> In article <765@rush.cts.com> bob@rush.cts.com (Bob Ames) writes:
> >Why all this talk of multiple gettys?  I've never used them.
> >What's wrong with 'Other Users' in the Office?
> 
> I can't find 'Other Users' in UA.  Is this a feature not found in 3.5?
> 
> >                                                The only people
> >that I can think of who would want multiple gettys are those who don't
> >use 'Office' and therefore can't do 'Other Users'.
> 
> This is I.
And I.

I believe this is also one of those "hooks" in the initialization of the
hard disk. When it asks you "Will this machine be used by more than one person?"
If you said no to this you got more available HD space (less swap) and
removed the "Other Users" option from the Office.

If yours is like my situation, you dont have other users but do want
to have multiple windows open you can do what I do:

I just removed the "exec ua" from my .profile and replaced it with exec ksh.
I than open another (or more) window via "windy -b ksh". With the "improved"
wmgr it is one key-stroke to go from one window to the next. The only
bad side effect this has is if you crtl-d in the parent window, you
run getty on that window and have to login again.

For those that do run ua but dont want windows remotely (1200 baud windows
are slooooow) just lie to /etc/profile by telling it you have a 2621
or some-such terminal type that it does not support windows on. Then
pick "run default shell" option from the next menu.

BTW, I am also running 3.5 but when my window freezes the machine is
DEAD, no key presses are recognized nor will it answer an incoming
call on the modem. I have been running 3.5 for over 2 years now
and have never been able to recuperate from a real "freeze" without
rebooting. What you describe sounds more like some application
died or left you in "raw" mode. "Raw mode" can be easily fixed by
typing "^J stty sane 9600 ^J".


				Hope this helps,

				Ron Fletcher
				AT&T Bell Laboratories
				Middletown NJ

les@chinet.UUCP (Leslie Mikesell) (09/01/88)

In article <631@bacchus.UUCP> darren@bacchus.UUCP (Darren Friedlein) writes:

>I don't like Office (UA) becuase the windows are big and clumsy, it takes up
>lots of memory, slows the system to a screaching halt (I only have 1meg now),
>and is in general a poor user interface.  [oh no, now I've done it, millions
>of UA fans after me :-].

Do you have any timing numbers to back this up?  I normally run ua at the
console, but only to open up a bunch of full-screen windows (a built-in
option in 3.51, easy enough under 3.5).  For some things I use windy
to give the borderless windows a name so I can find them easily from the
window screen.  This doesn't "seem" slow at all with 3.51 and 2 meg memory,
but I would like to know if there is anything to gain by using multiple
gettys.    BTW, I have been able to compile GNU emacs with HAVE_SYSVIPC
defined so that you can run emacs in server mode in one window, then
start emacsclient in another and edit by jumping to the window with
the running emacs (which will have your file loaded by the time you
get there).

Les

andys@genesis.ATT.COM (a.b.sherman) (09/01/88)

In article <3150@emory.uucp> wsm@emory.UUCP (William Mahavier) writes:
>What is the talk about 'Other Users' in the Office?
>I don't have such a choice in my office window. I
>am running 3.51. Have I missed something? How do I
>get an 'Other Users' choice? Thanks for any help.


Select Preferences from your Office.  There is an item there to give
your the OtherUsers selection in your office.  Make it YES and you
got it.  Enjoy.
-- 
andy sherman / at&t bell laboratories (medical diagnostic systems)
room 2e-108 / 185 monmouth pkwy / west long branch, nj 07764-1394
(201) 870-7018 / andys@shlepper.ATT.COM
...The views and opinions are my own.  Who else would want them?

wsm@emory.uucp (William Mahavier) (09/01/88)

In article <476@genesis.ATT.COM> andys@shlepper.ATT.COM (a.b.sherman) writes:
>In article <3150@emory.uucp> wsm@emory.UUCP (William Mahavier) writes:
>>What is the talk about 'Other Users' in the Office?
>>I don't have such a choice in my office window. I
>
>Select Preferences from your Office.  There is an item there to give
>your the OtherUsers selection in your office.  Make it YES and you
>got it.  Enjoy.
>-- 
>andy sherman / at&t bell laboratories (medical diagnostic systems)

Thanks to all who responded. I have and enjoy Other Users.

-- 
W. S. Mahavier         | wsm@mathcs.emory.edu      DOMAIN 
Emory University       | {decvax,gatech}!emory!wsm UUCP
Dept of Math and CS    | wsm@emory                 BITNET
Atlanta, Ga 30322      | Office phone: 404-727-7585

darren@bacchus.UUCP (Darren Friedlein) (09/02/88)

In article <6449@chinet.UUCP> les@chinet.UUCP (Leslie Mikesell) writes:
>In article <631@bacchus.UUCP> darren@bacchus.UUCP (Darren Friedlein) writes:
>
>>I don't like Office (UA) becuase the windows are big and clumsy, it takes up
>>lots of memory, slows the system to a screaching halt (I only have 1meg now),
>>and is in general a poor user interface.  [oh no, now I've done it, millions
>>of UA fans after me :-].
>
>Do you have any timing numbers to back this up?  I normally run ua at the
>console, but only to open up a bunch of full-screen windows (a built-in
>option in 3.51, easy enough under 3.5).  For some things I use windy
>to give the borderless windows a name so I can find them easily from the
>window screen.  This doesn't "seem" slow at all with 3.51 and 2 meg memory,
>but I would like to know if there is anything to gain by using multiple
>gettys.    BTW, I have been able to compile GNU emacs with HAVE_SYSVIPC
>defined so that you can run emacs in server mode in one window, then
>start emacsclient in another and edit by jumping to the window with
>the running emacs (which will have your file loaded by the time you
>get there).
>
>Les

2 meg of memory is better than 1.  If you have two meg, less gets
swapped out.  Less disk access equals higer speed.  I also have a data
line w/ users, uucp and bbs access to slow things down a little more.
(throw in a couple terminals...)  This is not necessarily the problem
though.  When I say the windows are slow, I mean they are sluggish in
coming up, erasing and re-sizing.  If I'm using a window interface, I
like to have things happen quickly.  Compare this to a MACII, Sun, etc.
and you'll see what I mean.

Going to multiple gettys doesn't mean you stop using UA.  Using multiple
gettys just gives you several logins.  You can run UA in every one if you
want (as long as you don't use more than 16 windows).

The windows on the UNIXpc aren't that bad - the borders are a little too
big for me, though (I need 80 columns) and they are slow.  UA is what
I really dislike - mainly because I can get things done MUCH faster in the
shell than pointing and clicking around UA.  Without windows, multiple
gettys wouldn't work either!

The main difference between a UAish window interface and a multiple-getty
interface is that when you go from one window to another in UA, the
parent window blocks untill the child window is killed.  With multiple-
gettys (ies?) each window can take user input and run programs
simultaneously.

Oh, one question I meant to include in my first message - What problems
have people been having with multiple-getttys?  I've been running 3-6
gettys since the idea was introduced and haven't run into any problems.
The status bar has trouble figuring out who you are (for the mail icon
and soforth) but I don't use that, so it never really concerned me...

-darren
         ____
        /    \
       |                                 Rt 4, Box 416, Durham, NC 27703
  _____|_____     Darren G. Friedlein      data (bacchus) : 919/596-7746
 /     |     \                                      voice : 919/596-9492
(      |      )
 \____/    __/   {mcnc|icus|ditka|ethos|gladys|bakerst}!bacchus!darren

les@chinet.UUCP (Leslie Mikesell) (09/02/88)

In article <637@bacchus.UUCP> darren@bacchus.UUCP (Darren Friedlein) writes:
 [ua vs. multiple gettys]

> When I say the windows are slow, I mean they are sluggish in
>coming up, erasing and re-sizing.

But the full-screen windows don't have this problem. They don't have
borders and can't be resized. They also don't get a name from ua but you
can use windy for that.  Does the <suspend> key give you a list of active
windows when you use multiple gettys or is that a function of ua?

>Going to multiple gettys doesn't mean you stop using UA.  Using multiple
>gettys just gives you several logins.  You can run UA in every one if you
>want (as long as you don't use more than 16 windows).

But the only reason I can see for using multiple gettys would be to
avoid loading ua at all.  That is, you should get the same effect by
opening a borderless window and executing su (if you want to be another
user), unless I am still missing something.

>The main difference between a UAish window interface and a multiple-getty
>interface is that when you go from one window to another in UA, the
>parent window blocks untill the child window is killed.  With multiple-
>gettys (ies?) each window can take user input and run programs
>simultaneously.

Not true!  You can see this easily if you put multiple bordered windows
on the screen and start jobs that generate output in all of them. Output
continues even if the window is not exposed - input blocks (of course)
until you switch to that window.  Parent-child relationships have no
effect on anything except where you land when a window is closed (but
many of the ua-ish things wait on their children to exit).  Using
<suspend> or the [w] icon, you can make any window active by selecting
from the list, or you can use shift-suspend (resume) to jump to the
next (previous).  The only thing strange is that the window you are
leaving becomes unblocked even if you have pressed ctl-S to pause
output (sometimes a pain when you want to stop something and jump
to an alternate window for a while - when you come back, things may
have scrolled off the screen).
 
Les Mikesell

jr@amanue.UUCP (Jim Rosenberg) (09/06/88)

In article <765@rush.cts.com> bob@rush.cts.com (Bob Ames) writes:
>Why all this talk of multiple gettys?  I've never used them.
>What's wrong with 'Other Users' in the Office?  The only people
>that I can think of who would want multiple gettys are those who don't
>use 'Office' and therefore can't do 'Other Users'.  Although
>those persons could always use 'su - user' to change users...  I'll bet that
>this, accompanied by a 'windy -b' would give you multiple windows...

I can't speak for anyone else, but as a certified card-carrying mutiple-getty
man let me relate some of the reasons why I like them.  Those of a religious
bent could argue that we're all init's children -- or more remote descendents
-- so what difference does the whole thing make anyway.  There's something to
this.  I am indeed one of those folks who *NEVER* goes into the Office.
Everything I want can be accessed more easily from the shell, thank you.  I
can't even count how many months since I've gone into the Office.  So why
should I have an Office process hanging around as the ancestor of *all* of my
shells???  Not to mention the fact that this [to me] useless process *CONSUMES
AN EXTRA WINDOW*!

In order to get multiple shells from the Office one has to do something
special for each shell.  With multiple gettys all one has to do is log in.  On
each window, if you foul up your terminal settings all you have to do is log
out and log back in again and woila, you have your screen fixed up completely.
Now admittedly this can be fixed with windy and stty sane echoe and a few
other things -- one or two of which I always seem to forget -- but it sure is
easy when all you have to do is log out and log back in again.  In a similar
vein, with multiple gettys I am *sure* each shell is running in its own
process group.  With multiple shells from the Office I'm not sure.  (Someone
wanna comment on this?)

I do have some remote users who dial in over the modem.  How easy to test
their logins by just logging in as them with their initial password on one of
the windows.


Now what are the disadvantages??  They all seem to relate to getlogin()
problems (based on analysis by other folks posted here.)  Those problems
haven't bugged me one bit -- but they could bother other people.  I don't
really feel personally insulted by not getting the envelope icon when I get
mail, I don't run shell scripts that depend on correct behavior by who.  I use
the machine mainly to support C software development, and multiple vi's and
shells and makes and all those other things work just fine with multiple
gettys.  I simply find it a simpler approach!

Just for the record, I am *not* bigoted against PARC-style user interfaces; I
find myself using the Mac for more and more things and admire that style of
user interface enormously -- when done right.  The User Agent is about as far
from implementing PARCish concepts as a blue whale is from implementing
vertical takeoff and landing.

Are multiple gettys right for you???  **TRY THEM AND SEE!!**  Each to his own
(or as they say in France, chalk one awesome goo!)
-- 
 Jim Rosenberg
     CIS: 71515,124                         decvax!idis! \
     WELL: jer                                   allegra! ---- pitt!amanue!jr
     BIX: jrosenberg                  uunet!cmcl2!cadre! /

les@chinet.UUCP (Leslie Mikesell) (09/09/88)

In article <401@amanue.UUCP> jr@amanue.UUCP (Jim Rosenberg) writes:

>In order to get multiple shells from the Office one has to do something
>special for each shell.  With multiple gettys all one has to do is log in.

The "something special" consists of selecting "full screen unix" with the
arrow key and pressing <enter>. Not so difficult.  Hit suspend, select the
office and do it again.. (On 3.51.. Earlier version needed a small change
to the shell start-up command to give you a full screen).

>On each window, if you foul up your terminal settings all you have to do is log
>out and log back in again and woila, you have your screen fixed up completely.

Likewise from the office, and you just have to press <enter> for the new screen
since the "full screen unix" will already be selected.

>.. with multiple gettys I am *sure* each shell is running in its own
>process group.  With multiple shells from the Office I'm not sure.  (Someone
>wanna comment on this?)

Yes, you can do a "kill 0" from one shell without bothering any of the others.

>I do have some remote users who dial in over the modem.  How easy to test
>their logins by just logging in as them with their initial password on one of
>the windows.

su - username
would work nicely from a full-screen shell.

>Just for the record, I am *not* bigoted against PARC-style user interfaces.

The user interface to the SysV lp spooler is especially gruesome, and that
is about the only thing I use out of the office other than starting a bunch
of full-screen shells.

>Are multiple gettys right for you???  **TRY THEM AND SEE!!**  Each to his own
>(or as they say in France, chalk one awesome goo!)

The only functional advantage seems to be the savings of a process (ua) and
a window for it.

Les Mikesell

richard@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Richard Foulk) (09/10/88)

}>Are multiple gettys right for you???  **TRY THEM AND SEE!!**  Each to his own
} >(or as they say in France, chalk one awesome goo!)
} 
} The only functional advantage seems to be the savings of a process (ua) and
} a window for it.

And, most importantly, never having to look at that gruesome UA again!

Richard