On Wed, 01 Apr 1998 21:33:57 -0000 (GMT) 
 jiho@postal.c-zone.net wrote:

 > In comparing UVM and FreeBSD, what interests me is the implementation of
 > vfork(), since that would seem to be at the heart of the problem I've been
 > moaning about.
 > 
 > Looking in the current source, UVM appears to do the right thing.  The parent
 > vmspace is used by the child until exec(), where it's released and a new
 > vmspace created for the child.  No funny business is inflicted on the parent. 
 > Very fast, very clean.

In NetBSD-current, the Mach VM code base also has a Real vfork(2).  (I am
the person who implemented it, and I did it in the Mach VM, and Chuck ported
it to UVM.)

Jason R. Thorpe                                       thorpej@nas.nasa.gov
NASA Ames Research Center                            Home: +1 408 866 1912
NAS: M/S 258-5                                       Work: +1 650 604 0935
Moffett Field, CA 94035                             Pager: +1 415 428 6939