From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Jun 17 22:27:36 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id WAA29599
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 22:27:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA29592
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 22:27:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id WAA02092; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 22:26:57 -0700 (PDT)
To: Sean Eric Fagan <sef@kithrup.com>
cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org, michaelh@cet.co.jp
Subject: Re: vfork cow? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 17 Jun 1996 20:24:30 PDT."
             <199606180324.UAA04977@kithrup.com> 
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 22:26:57 -0700
Message-ID: <2090.835075617@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> vfork's main difference from fork() is that the parent is waits for the
> child to exec or exit.  SysVrX (X < 4) systems that didn't have vfork had to

Aem..  Yes, I did sort of forget to mention this aspect of its
behavior also (blush - and I just went over this code in Kirk's class
not 5 weeks ago :-).

						Jordan