From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16474 invoked by alias); 12 Sep 2004 05:56:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact glibc-bugs-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: glibc-bugs-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 16465 invoked by uid 48); 12 Sep 2004 05:56:27 -0000 Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 05:56:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040912055627.16464.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "drepper at redhat dot com" To: glibc-bugs@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <20040910004801.378.dennis@mds.rmit.edu.au> References: <20040910004801.378.dennis@mds.rmit.edu.au> Reply-To: sourceware-bugzilla@sources.redhat.com Subject: [Bug nptl/378] posix_spawn implementation, use vfork/execve rather than fork/execve for NPTL Linux. X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00055.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From drepper at redhat dot com 2004-09-12 05:56 ------- It is not possible to just use vfork. The problem are the atfork handlers which can be registered. In the child process they can modify the address space. These changes then would be visible in the parent process. The best one can do is to let the user select this behavior. A new spawn attribute (along with setter/getter functions) can be created. If the flag is set in the attribute vfork is used instead of fork. Then it is the programmers fault if something goes wrong because of the atfork handlers. In fact, we should just not run the atfork handlers if vfork is used. -- What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=378 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.