X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <2cf50a010810101850jc21f80bi3c40c816635d8366@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2008 12:50:03 +1100 From: "Jack Andrews" To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: optimizing fork/exec in vendor source In-Reply-To: <20081010142640.GB15821@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <2cf50a010810092225q1d7190e6k8f8a4f152fce4de4@mail.gmail.com> <48EF48B2.8070603@byu.net> <2cf50a010810100626j74c804a4m6ce87dfc0f284505@mail.gmail.com> <20081010142640.GB15821@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 1:26 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>this seems to be an easy problem in cygwin (at least, in comparison to >>fork). and would fix one of the biggest problems with cygwin (or at >>least cygwin bash). who has to hold the copyright? > > It is not an "easy problem" and there are no guarantees that it would > fix anything. i'm naive when it comes to cygwin internals, but the obvious similarity of posix_spawn to CreateProcess is seductive. can you give me an example of one of the difficulties of implementing posix_spawn in cygwin so i don't bother the list anymore? ta, jack. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/