From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Mar 18 23:02:20 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id XAA07261
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 18 Mar 1997 23:02:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA07234
          for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 18 Mar 1997 23:02:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id XAA20256; Tue, 18 Mar 1997 23:01:42 -0800 (PST)
To: Stephen McKay <syssgm@dtir.qld.gov.au>
cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: REPOST: dup3() - interesting feature-in-training or silly hack? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 19 Mar 1997 16:40:30 +1000."
             <199703190640.QAA16421@ogre.dtir.qld.gov.au> 
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 23:01:42 -0800
Message-ID: <20252.858754902@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> I think you've had an interesting learning experience doing this (tragic)
> thing to your kernel, but now you should put it all back.

:-) :-)

Yes, I'd already decided that well before now.

Of course, having to allocate virtual terminals all over the place
just to get a flexible I/O model is rude and disgusting too, and only
shows that somebody wasn't thinking hard enough when they decided that
having stdin, stdout and stderr constituted "sufficient interaction"
for a UNIX process.

Now if just files and sockets and pipes went away and became
generalized CORBA objects, we could...  *Wurgh* Sorry...  Still some
lingering side-effects. :-)

					Jordan