Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 19:27:54 +0200 From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@backplane.com>, Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>, Bruce Evans <bde@FreeBSD.ORG>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/gen popen.c Message-ID: <19981011192754.34404@follo.net> In-Reply-To: <19981011193603.A28135@nagual.pp.ru>; from Andrey A. Chernov on Sun, Oct 11, 1998 at 07:36:03PM %2B0400 References: <199810110309.LAA18511@spinner.netplex.com.au> <199810110906.CAA02043@apollo.backplane.com> <19981011193603.A28135@nagual.pp.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Oct 11, 1998 at 07:36:03PM +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: > On Sun, Oct 11, 1998 at 02:06:17AM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote: > > Wait a second!!!!!! vfork() was specifically designed for situations > > where you call the exec*() functions. That's the whole point of > > using vfork() rather then fork()!!!!! > > Yes, I agree too. There is a lots programs which do that way, much more > than in our src tree. Exec*() must be fixed instead to avoid calling > malloc() exec() isn't the only problem. There are programs calling e.g. wanr() on failure of the exec(). We have to do an audit WRT which programs are abusing vfork(), anyway... Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19981011192754.34404>