Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 20 Aug 1996 23:57:27 +0100 (BST) | From | Bryn Paul Arnold Jones <> | Subject | Re: getting Linux into business.. |
| |
On Tue, 20 Aug 1996, Rob McKee wrote:
> > On Sun, 18 Aug 1996, Bryn Paul Arnold Jones wrote: > > > You don't seem to understand, fork() _IS_ clone(0), not equilivent to, not > > like, but IS. I don't see any point in doing fork() based threads now, > > and clone based later, just get the clone stuff done. We could (should > > IMHO) remove fork(2), and implement fork(3). > > alright.. howabout getting a clone(0,COPYVM|SIGCLD) threads lib going > first and then finish up a clone(astackptr,SIGCLD) threads lib down the > road.. >
Erm, I think you mean clone(CLONE_VM|CLONE_SIGHAND), and the second one seems like a step back to me .... The flags are in <linux/sched.h> ;), shouldn't these be moved out, or at least the kernel specfic bits moved inside "#ifdef __kernel__"'s (anyone) ?
There is a clone based threads package avalable, which proberbly need some debuging. Ie get, test, report bugs, ..., test, perfect -> hay presto, one clone based threads lib ...
Bryn -- PGP key pass phrase forgotten, \ Overload -- core meltdown sequence again :( and I don't care ;) | initiated. / This space is intentionally left | blank, apart from this text ;-) \____________________________________
|  |