Re: Porting vfork()

Horst von Brand (vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl)
Sun, 10 Jan 1999 19:24:24 -0400

Kenneth Albanowski <kjahds@kjahds.com> said:
> On Sat, 9 Jan 1999, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> > Why? -- Please name 5 things that require vfork to work properly.

> Four pieces of old software -- unfortunately I don't have any old software
> on me at the moment -- plus an OS/processor that can't support fork().
>
> Oh, and, <http://www.netbsd.org/Documentation/kernel/vfork.html>, just for
> the heck of it.
>
> No, not very good excuses. But it's pleasent to make something reasonably
> elegant -- and _quite_ traditional -- with so little effort.

Next question: How much performance increase for vfork(2) (not necesarily
"customary semantics", just lightweight fork(2) for (almost) immediate
exec(2))?

[Easy to do and elegant != worth the trouble]

-- 
Horst von Brand                             vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl
Casilla 9G, Viņa del Mar, Chile                               +56 32 672616


-
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/