On 27 Aug 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> In article <20000827175449.A7759@hq.fsmlabs.com>,
> <yodaiken@fsmlabs.com> wrote:
> >
> >In the POSIX spec fork demolishes all threads in the child. This is the
> >only sensible answer and it seems wasteful to ignore the rare sensible
> >parts of the POSIX spec.
>
> What?
>
> That is not sensible, EITHER.
Umm... It is, actually. It is an attempt to say that threads should act
like processes (which they are) even if somebody is perverted enough to
emulate them as pieces of process.
IOW, if one is playing silly buggers with thread-as-a-part-of-process he
is going to be bitten by fork() copying the whole whorehouse into the new
process. POSIX says that this bug is, well, a bug.
We don't do that idiocy in the first place. End of the story. Thread is a
process, so there is no crap that would be copied by fork() and could be
confused for a bunch of threads. Nothing to demolish.
Read it as a warning about a bad bug in thread-as-a-part-of-process
implementations that requires a workaround and it will make sense. Very
nice of them to put this warning there, but it doesn't apply to us.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 31 2000 - 21:00:20 EST