From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Jan 27 05:21:18 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id FAA05875
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 05:21:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from terra.Sarnoff.COM (terra.sarnoff.com [130.33.11.203])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id FAA05870
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 05:21:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from rminnich@localhost) by terra.Sarnoff.COM (8.6.12/8.6.12) id IAA19691; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:20:14 -0500
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:20:13 -0500 (EST)
From: "Ron G. Minnich" <rminnich@Sarnoff.COM>
X-Sender: rminnich@terra
To: RHS Linux User <dicen@hooked.net>
cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: What to do about the 2.0 GNU libc?
In-Reply-To: <32EBC435.63297F3E@hooked.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.970127081833.19633A-100000@terra>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

I just wanted to mention that:  rfork as it now exists on openbsd/freebsd
does as much as clone does on my latest linux 2.x. Actually judging by 
the comments in my kernel source it is possible that rfork on freebsd is 
somewhat more useful than clone on linux.

ron

Ron Minnich                |"Failure is not an option" -- Gene Kranz
rminnich@sarnoff.com       | -- except, of course, on Microsoft products
(609)-734-3120             |
ftp://ftp.sarnoff.com/pub/mnfs/www/docs/cluster.html