delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: cygwin-developers/2002/01/03/21:33:37

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 -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019