Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 28 Oct 1996 11:32:00 +0100
From:      Wolfram Schneider <wosch@cs.tu-berlin.de>
To:        joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch)
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org (FreeBSD hackers), csubl@csv.warwick.ac.uk
Subject:   Re: Priorities?
Message-ID:  <199610281032.LAA02943@campa.panke.de>
In-Reply-To: <199610251954.VAA09631@uriah.heep.sax.de>
References:  <199610251533.KAA02790@dyson.iquest.net> <199610251954.VAA09631@uriah.heep.sax.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
J. Wunsch writes:
>`idleprio' processes are being scheduled only if absolutely no other
>processes are runnable, and the system would otherwise enter the idle
>loop.  Thus, they are good e.g. for X11 screen savers.

I remembered my department defined a 'xlock' icon in .fvwmrc
for new users. They used 'nice -20 xlock'. It was a disaster 
on X terminals, nobody can login because the server for the X
terminals are never idle.

Wolfram



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610281032.LAA02943>