Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<0c3a01c194c8$3b378970$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From:	"Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To:	<cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
Subject:	daemon fork?
Date:	Fri, 4 Jan 2002 13:33:44 +1100
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-OriginalArrivalTime:	04 Jan 2002 02:33:33.0631 (UTC) FILETIME=[346244F0:01C194C8]

Just had a brainstorm:
would fork () via a call to a daemon be easier than local fork?

AFAICT it could be, because both processes can be paused, syncronisation
should be easier.

Anyway, just a thought.

Rob

- Raw text -