I've used a machine with a real vfork() before now. The parent would crash
if the child left the function that vfork() is called from.
vfork is designed for just one purpose, a cheap replacment for fork() for
when you're spawning a new process from a shell (like program). It must
be used in code
Eric J. Korpela writes:
: The parent process's data segment is not copied, just re-alloced, and
: rather than returning to the parrent process, fork sleeps on the parents
: child_wait wait queue.
Let me try to remind myself of the vfork semantics Basically,
rather
: This is essentially what I have done. The only problem with doing this is
: that when fork() returns to the child, and the child calls exec(), the stack
: will be modified, so when the parent comes to return from fork(), it will
: crash, or at best do something odd.
Ok. When vfork()
Greg Haerr writes:
: This is essentially what I have done. The only problem with doing this is
: that when fork() returns to the child, and the child calls exec(), the stack
: will be modified, so when the parent comes to return from fork(), it will
: crash, or at best do something odd.
:
: : The scheme I am using at the moment, that of copying the bottom 100 bytes
: : of the stack for the child to use, works, but does not really offer any
: : kind of safety net. Is it fair to just accept that if a process vfork()s,
: : and does not exec or exit, but instead carries on, it
On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Greg Haerr wrote:
: The parent process's data segment is not copied, just re-alloced, and
: rather than returning to the parrent process, fork sleeps on the parents
: child_wait wait queue.
Let me try to remind myself of the vfork semantics Basically,
rather than
: The parent process's data segment is not copied, just re-alloced, and
: rather than returning to the parrent process, fork sleeps on the parents
: child_wait wait queue.
Let me try to remind myself of the vfork semantics Basically,
rather than copying the data segment on
