[ On Sat, April 4, 1998 at 19:59:48 (-0000), jiho@postal.c-zone.net wrote: ]
> Subject: Real vfork()  (was: third results)
>
> I think it's generally significant if there are programs that needed revision
> to work right with a revised system call.

Strictly speaking the "new" vfork() is merely implementing the semantics
that have *always* been documented for it.

Any user programs that "broke" with its proper implmentation were in
fact already broken long before since they voilated the specification
and probably should not have been using vfork() in the first place.

That they were "fixed" is indeed a terribly *minor* event in the change
history of the OS as a whole (i.e. "CHANGES" ;-).

I remember doing exactly the opposite and tracing through the 0.9 and
1.0 sources to find out why vfork() wasn't doing as it was documented to
do (and as I'd always observed it to do on 4.3BSD and even SunOS-4)!  ;-)

-- 
							Greg A. Woods

+1 416 443-1734      VE3TCP      <gwoods@acm.org>      <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>