Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 12:16:48 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Wojciech Galazka <wgalazka AT chem DOT uw DOT edu DOT pl>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Why not fork() etc. specific for for shell usage?
In-Reply-To: <339D869D.506@chem.uw.edu.pl>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.970615121523.14561S-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Wojciech Galazka wrote:

> >  Under DPMI, someone will have to setup and copy the
> > current data space (and probably the code space) to a new one for the
> > child. 
> 
> Fine. Let's assume we did this. And what next. How can you make
> parent and child processes to both work at the same time without hacking
> DOS or or DJGPP startup code.

That's not what the original poster had in mind.  He was suggesting to 
have a version of `fork' that will only return after the child has 
exited, but would otherwise work like on Unix.