From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Dec 28 08:56:13 1994
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id IAA22961 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 28 Dec 1994 08:56:13 -0800
Received: from cs.weber.edu (cs.weber.edu [137.190.16.16]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with SMTP id IAA22955 for <freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com>; Wed, 28 Dec 1994 08:56:12 -0800
Received: by cs.weber.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1.1)
	id AA04646; Wed, 28 Dec 94 09:46:39 MST
From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert)
Message-Id: <9412281646.AA04646@cs.weber.edu>
Subject: Generic vfork question (was: fork() in unistd.h)
To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.sax.de
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 94 9:46:39 MST
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com
In-Reply-To: <199412281250.NAA07747@bonnie.tcd-dresden.de> from "J Wunsch" at Dec 28, 94 01:50:07 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4dev PL52]
Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

> conflicting?  i've only noticed the conflict between fork() and vfork().
> 

Speaking of vfork, what would be the impact of using vfork() instead of
fork followed by a stack switch out in order to implement light weight
kernel threads?


					Terry Lambert
					terry@cs.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.