ons 2009-11-25 klockan 09:07 +1100 skrev Robert Collins: > On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 13:45 +0100, Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > > tis 2009-11-24 klockan 15:06 +1100 skrev Robert Collins: > > > > > http://www.netbsd.org/docs/kernel/vfork.html has some interesting notes > > > from the BSD world about this. > > > > vfork is fundamentally broken. > > Beyond the obvious (that it doesn't separate the memory out?) Undefined results if any of the following is used: - threads - signals - any form of output - pretty much any other syscall than an successful execve > > there is other alternatives coming, getting around the virtual memory > > issue when starting new processes. > > What are they called? Searching.. posix_spawn() and it's posix_spawnp() wrapper seems to be the one. Regards Henrik
