Gee, I wish the companies whose software I use were so willing to port
for me :-)
> When it does happen the programmer usually inserts another #ifdef LINUX
> into code that otherwise would require no modification, folds his arms
> across his chest, and chants "I really do love Linux" 3 times.
What is this crappy application code then ;-) I have never seen any code
that *relies* on vfork() being different to fork().
> So, the question: is linux vfork() behavior annoying anyone else and is it
> worth fixing? (other than to eliminate its appearance in the BUG area of the
> Linux fork() man page ;)
I can't say I've noticed much call for "fixing" this. Look at all the
software which runs just fine on Linux out of the box. Maybe this is
another of those data points that says free software is more portable
;-)
That said, now that multiple tasks can share an MMU context, it would
probably be quite easy to support vfork() semantics.
-- Jamie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/