[comp.unix.internals] Control-T

garif@cmcl2.NYU.EDU (Caligari's Coffin) (10/11/90)

avg@hq.demos.su (Vadim G. Antonov) writes:
>(Curiousily, but I've inserted ^T in v6 tty driver, but later I removed it -
>ps produces more readable output :-)

I seem to recall that Ultrix allows a control-t trapped to some kind of
process status output.  Does anyone know how to set this? (besides the
requisite [stty status "^t"].

\\Lee

cudcv@warwick.ac.uk (Rob McMahon) (10/13/90)

In article <50178@cmcl2.NYU.EDU> garif@cmcl2.NYU.EDU (Caligari's Coffin) writes:
>avg@hq.demos.su (Vadim G. Antonov) writes:
>>(Curiousily, but I've inserted ^T in v6 tty driver, but later I removed it -
>>ps produces more readable output :-)
>
>I seem to recall that Ultrix allows a control-t trapped to some kind of
>process status output.

I once did this to a BSD 4.2 system: added a `stty enq ^T' that would cause a
SIGENQ to be sent to the appropriate process group.  The signal was ignored by
default, and I modified the compiler drivers passes to report pass, filename,
linenumber, and number of errors.  (I'd just come from a Burroughs B6800 where
you could do `?CS' to get the same information, and it seemed like a good idea
at the time.)  It was actually quite useful, but then compiles took longer in
those days.  The only problem was that not enough programs supported it.  I
was going to make the kernel print out some cheap stuff from the proc
structure for each process, but never did.

Rob, in reminisce mode.
--
UUCP:   ...!mcsun!ukc!warwick!cudcv	PHONE:  +44 203 523037
JANET:  cudcv@uk.ac.warwick             INET:   cudcv@warwick.ac.uk
Rob McMahon, Computing Services, Warwick University, Coventry CV4 7AL, England