On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 5:44 PM, Barath Aron <baratha...@caesar.elte.hu> wrote: > My question is that the _posixsubprocess.c can be prepared to use > posix_spawn(3) instead of fork(2)? Maybe the UNIX/Linux version can also > benefit from it, see: > https://salsa.debian.org/ruby-team/ruby-posix-spawn
There is an open issue to add os.posix_spawn() at https://bugs.python.org/issue20104 --Berker _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
