Re: [osol-discuss] Re: vfork issues
Felix Schulte wrote: On 12/20/06, Felix Schulte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12/19/06, Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's not something one is supposed to take advantage of! From vfork(2) (albeit admittedly the SX version of the man page): The vfork() function is deprecated. Its sole legitimate use as a prelude to an immediate call to a function from the exec family can be achieved safely by posix_spawn(3C) or posix_spawnp(3C). Read http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ksh93-integration-discuss/2006-October/001587.html and following posts posix_spawn(3C) is broken in Solaris 11/10 and I would not use it to use until Sun fixes this and ports the fix back to older Solaris versions What happened to the link? I am getting a HTTP file not found for it The archive was just moved because the disk was full. AFAIK this should be fixed as soon as the admins are back from their vacation... Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, CJAVASunUnix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: vfork issues
Felix Schulte wrote: On 12/19/06, Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's not something one is supposed to take advantage of! From vfork(2) (albeit admittedly the SX version of the man page): The vfork() function is deprecated. Its sole legitimate use as a prelude to an immediate call to a function from the exec family can be achieved safely by posix_spawn(3C) or posix_spawnp(3C). Read http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ksh93-integration-discuss/2006-October/001587.html and following posts posix_spawn(3C) is broken in Solaris 11/10 and I would not use it to use until Sun fixes this and ports the fix back to older Solaris versions That is not correct. |posix_spawn()| just has a tiny glitch which may hurt you under rare conditions (the ksh93-interation list has more details (the archive is offline right now but I can provide the links once it's online again) ; in general ksh93 is affected but still works with the buggy |posix_spawn()| under normal conditions). Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, CJAVASunUnix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: vfork issues
On 12/20/06, Felix Schulte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 12/19/06, Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's not something one is supposed to take advantage of! From vfork(2) (albeit admittedly the SX version of the man page): The vfork() function is deprecated. Its sole legitimate use as a prelude to an immediate call to a function from the exec family can be achieved safely by posix_spawn(3C) or posix_spawnp(3C). Read http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ksh93-integration-discuss/2006-October/001587.html and following posts posix_spawn(3C) is broken in Solaris 11/10 and I would not use it to use until Sun fixes this and ports the fix back to older Solaris versions What happened to the link? I am getting a HTTP file not found for it -- _Felix Schulte _|_|_ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (0 0) ooO--(_)--Ooo ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: vfork issues
On 12/19/06, Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's not something one is supposed to take advantage of! From vfork(2) (albeit admittedly the SX version of the man page): The vfork() function is deprecated. Its sole legitimate use as a prelude to an immediate call to a function from the exec family can be achieved safely by posix_spawn(3C) or posix_spawnp(3C). Read http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ksh93-integration-discuss/2006-October/001587.html and following posts posix_spawn(3C) is broken in Solaris 11/10 and I would not use it to use until Sun fixes this and ports the fix back to older Solaris versions -- _Felix Schulte _|_|_ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (0 0) ooO--(_)--Ooo ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: vfork issues
Felix Schulte writes: Read http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ksh93-integration-discuss/2006-October/001587.html and following posts posix_spawn(3C) is broken in Solaris 11/10 and I would not use it to use until Sun fixes this and ports the fix back to older Solaris versions I think that might be a bit hyperbolic. The associated CR is 6488832, which was fixed in Nevada build 53, and is in progress for S10. The issue is fairly narrow and affects only a few usage patterns of posix_spawn. Unfortunately, one of them is ksh93, but that most certainly does not mean that _all_ designers should avoid posix_spawn in _all_ cases. Instead, see the CR first, and determine if it matters for what you're trying to do. -- James Carlson, KISS Network[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: vfork issues
On 12/19/06, Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's not something one is supposed to take advantage of! From vfork(2) (albeit admittedly the SX version of the man page): The vfork() function is deprecated. Its sole legitimate use as a prelude to an immediate call to a function from the exec family can be achieved safely by posix_spawn(3C) or posix_spawnp(3C). Read http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ksh93-integration-discuss/2006-October/001587.html and following posts posix_spawn(3C) is broken in Solaris 11/10 and I would not use it to use until Sun fixes this and ports the fix back to older Solaris versions I would say that calling it broken is way too strong. (The particular bug you refer to is fixed in current Nevada) Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: vfork issues
Well, since I do not have open solaris setup to test this I used 5.8, might be it behave the same in open source as well...then its justified to post it here :) Anyway, below is my code (As an experiment I did this in linux and result matched my expectation) On SPARC with Sun Studio compilers I get: Child Process: Global variable: 3 Stack variable: 21 Parent Process: Global variable: 3 Stack variable: 21 Which compilers did you use? (Compilers need to know how to handle vfork() they may optimize incorrectly) Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
