From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 23 14:30:38 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51E2B16A4CE for ; Sat, 23 Apr 2005 14:30:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from delight.idiom.com (delight.idiom.com [216.240.32.16]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24A0143D39 for ; Sat, 23 Apr 2005 14:30:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from idiom.com (idiom.com [216.240.32.1]) by delight.idiom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB7721F0DB0; Sat, 23 Apr 2005 07:30:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.3] (home.elischer.org [216.240.48.38]) by idiom.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j3NEUaFP022602; Sat, 23 Apr 2005 07:30:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Message-ID: <426A5C0C.4050700@elischer.org> Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 07:30:36 -0700 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050214 X-Accept-Language: en, hu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lyndon Nerenberg References: <5bbfe7d40504220842578b2d2d@mail.gmail.com> <426953C5.9080502@elischer.org> <5bbfe7d4050422150226c6712d@mail.gmail.com> <9328DC9EC69D53548F9E444F@peregrin.orthanc.ca> In-Reply-To: <9328DC9EC69D53548F9E444F@peregrin.orthanc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: FreeBSD Hackers Subject: Re: libthread 1:1 threads X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 14:30:38 -0000 Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > --On 2005-4-22 3:02 PM -0700 David Leimbach wrote: > >> According to the man page, and plan 9 where rfork originated you can >> use it to modify an extant process. In fact you have to set the >> RFPROC flag to make a new process or all the changes apply to the >> current one. > > > Unfortunately the semantics of FreeBSD rfork() have diverted far enough > from the original plan9 rfork() such that you can't consider it as the > same call. This makes life miserable for things like running Inferno on > FreeBSD. patches to fix this would probably be accepted.. as long as other functionality wask kept 'available' > > --lyndon > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"