Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 08:46:55 -0700 From: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> To: shel@softweyr.com Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rfork() [was: Concept check] Message-ID: <387CA1EF.5F4C84F4@softweyr.com> References: <200001120534.AAA10170@unknown.nowhere.org> <200001120556.VAA67332@apollo.backplane.com> <20000111224129.K302@sturm.canonware.com> <200001120701.XAA67787@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthew Dillon wrote:
>
> :>
> :> 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 :-(
Sheldon, do you want to tackle that one? You seem to be in a manpage mood
these days.
--
"Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?"
Wes Peters Softweyr LLC
wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.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?387CA1EF.5F4C84F4>