Re: Potential new syscall

[Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost>]

>> [...] - "just use fork" is a very common response, but no matter how
>> fork gets implemented, vfork() when used correctly always performs
>> better by huge margins.
> But most of those cases are handled just as well by posix_spawn.

Possibly - but most of a system's operation is handled perfectly well
by no more than a few dozen syscalls.  Is that a reason to get rid of
the rest?

If you want, sure, use posix_spawn when it's applicable.  But it's also
nice to have something that can handle the cases where it _isn't_
applicable - which is, in a sense, what fork() is for, but it's also
nice to not cripple performance unnecessarily.  And, in my case, the
only easy answer was to make vfork() equivalent to fork() in the
_emulated_ system, which I consider a last-ditch fallback.  The new
syscall is almost as easy (for me) and much closer to correct.

/~\ The ASCII				  Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML		mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B