Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 23:01:04 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Jason Evans <jasone@canonware.com> Cc: Alexander Litvin <archer@lucky.net>, Scott Hess <scott@avantgo.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: rfork() [was: Concept check] Message-ID: <200001120701.XAA67787@apollo.backplane.com> References: <200001120534.AAA10170@unknown.nowhere.org> <200001120556.VAA67332@apollo.backplane.com> <20000111224129.K302@sturm.canonware.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:>
:> The reason is that rfork(RFMEM) does not give the new process a new
:> stack, so both the old and new processes wind up on the same original
:> stack and stomp all over each other.
:
:There is an implementation of clone() in the linuxthreads port, written by
:Richard Seaman.
:
:Jason
No manual page, tho :-(
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<dillon@backplane.com>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200001120701.XAA67787>