Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site sdcrdcf.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!sdcrdcf!jonab
From: jonab@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Jonathan Biggar)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: nice(1) takes an absolute priority a
Message-ID: <1549@sdcrdcf.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 13-Dec-84 14:49:23 EST
Article-I.D.: sdcrdcf.1549
Posted: Thu Dec 13 14:49:23 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 16-Dec-84 09:19:05 EST
References: <243@utcs.UUCP> <47500003@ccvaxa.UUCP> <4100@elsie.UUCP>
Reply-To: jonab@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Jonathan Biggar)
Organization: System Development Corp. R+D, Santa Monica
Lines: 7
Summary: 

I doubt that Berkely every had plans to remove the nice call in favor of
get/setpriority.  They just provided an upwards compatible feature
and changed the nice system call to a library routine that used
get/setpriority.  To remove nice would be committing suicide.

Jon Biggar
{allegra,burdvax,cbosgd,hplabs,ihnp4,sdccsu3}!sdcrdcf!jonab