Gavin Scott writes an excellent post regarding :ABORTPROCESS and the possible
value of
>
>                   a more fine-grained :ABORTJOB, not a magical "process-
> be-gone" command.

Hear! Hear!  Well said, sir, throughout.  I spent some time working on a
problem in which certain RoadRunner processes got stuck in a non-abortable
state and someone at HPRC said that it looked likely that we would be getting
an :ABORTPROC to which I responded fairly negatively.  I don't want to have the
ability to blow random processes out of the water nearly as I want them to not
need that sort of treatment.  As Gavin so astutely said, tell me what's going
on and I'll deal with it (call HPRC, do an :ABORTIO, whatever is appropriate).
I don't think that it's a bragging point that the NT folks can kill a process,
I think it's a shame that they need to and the response for that sort of thing
in MPE isn't to give us the ability but to solve the problem which created the
need.

Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([log in to unmask]), Info Serv, Southern Adventist University
          ==========================================================
I think that there is a moral to this story, namely that it is more
important to have beauty in one's equations that to have them fit
experiment. . . .  It seems that if one is working from the point of view of
getting beauty in one's equations, and if one has really a sound insight,
one is on a sure line of progress.
                                        -- Dirac, Paul Adrien Maurice (1902- )