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