Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 7 Jan 1999 13:15:20 -0500 (EST) | From | Benjamin LaHaise <> | Subject | Re: Porting vfork() |
| |
On Tue, 5 Jan 1999 kernel@draper.net wrote:
> So, the question: is linux vfork() behavior annoying anyone else and is it > worth fixing? (other than to eliminate its appearance in the BUG area of the > Linux fork() man page ;)
Given that vfork() isn't implemented yet, I'd say that noone feels particularly interested in it. With clone already in place, it could be implemented fairly easily, but that doesn't mean that it should: the manpage for vfork() on a Solaris box I have access to claims that the function will be removed in a future release. Also, vfork() has very wierd semantics (something about returning EOF on reading from ttys?) that would be a chore to implement. Linux would probably be better served implementing a spawn() type creature, as that's the problem vfork() meant to solve.
-ben
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |