Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 12 Jan 2000 08:47:06 -0700
From:      Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>
To:        Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za>
Cc:        hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: rfork() [was: Concept check]
Message-ID:  <387CA1FA.3B14779D@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?387CA1FA.3B14779D>