Messages in this thread | | | From | "Alan Curry" <> | Subject | Re: vfork | Date | Wed, 10 Nov 1999 13:01:04 -0500 (EST) |
| |
Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl writes the following: > >The present page stresses that it may be unwise to think >these are good reasons. Of course, as soon as you no longer >connect the BSD vfork with the Linux vfork then Linux got >a private system call (of which nobody so far has shown the use, >but which might be useful in special circumstances).
How many people really use clone() directly (as opposed to indirectly through libc)? Yet there's a clone(2) man page. Actually, why not drop the vfork(2) man page and add the description of the CLONE_VFORK flag in clone(2). That might have the psychological effect you're aiming for.
People who want to write high-performance Linux-only stuff should have _some_ documentation to turn to.
- 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/
| |