Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Porting vfork() | Date | Sat, 09 Jan 1999 11:16:34 -0500 | From | "Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH" <> |
| |
In message <199901081012.FAA22697@saturn.cs.uml.edu>, "Albert D. Cahalan" write s: +----- | NetBSD has a "Why implement traditional vfork()" page that explains | why they reimplemented vfork(). It seems vfork() is still good. | | http://www.netbsd.org/Documentation/kernel/vfork.html +--->8
"It shaves several seconds off a build of libc on a 200MHz PPro."
If the libc build only takes 1-3 minutes I might buy that argument.
-- brandon s. allbery [os/2][linux][solaris][japh] allbery@kf8nh.apk.net system administrator [WAY too many hats] allbery@ece.cmu.edu carnegie mellon / electrical and computer engineering KF8NH We are Linux. Resistance is an indication that you missed the point.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |