From owner-freebsd-current  Tue Apr 16 08:50:26 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id IAA20445
          for current-outgoing; Tue, 16 Apr 1996 08:50:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu (halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.159])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA20438
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Tue, 16 Apr 1996 08:50:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu; (5.65/1.1.8.2/19Aug95-0530PM)
	id AA17258; Tue, 16 Apr 1996 11:49:40 -0400
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 11:49:40 -0400
From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@lcs.mit.edu>
Message-Id: <9604161549.AA17258@halloran-eldar.lcs.mit.edu>
To: Mike Grupenhoff <kashmir@umiacs.UMD.EDU>
Cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: rfork() changes 
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.93.960416111114.14742B-100000@xanadu.umiacs.umd.edu>
References: <199604161003.SAA04157@jhome.DIALix.COM>
	<Pine.SUN.3.93.960416111114.14742B-100000@xanadu.umiacs.umd.edu>
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

<<On Tue, 16 Apr 1996 11:32:00 -0400 (EDT), Mike Grupenhoff <kashmir@umiacs.UMD.EDU> said:

> IMO, considering that the point of vfork() was as a faster fork() for
> exec()ing a new program, and not for address space sharing, programs that
> abuse the address sharing bogusness present in old implementations deserve
> to die.  I can't imagine too many of them exist anyway.

I would have no problem with implementing vfork() in libc as a call
for fork().  Then, we can redeclare vfork() as LIBCOMPAT in
syscalls.master, using fork() as the function, and eliminate all the
kernel cruft completely.

-GAWollman

--
Garrett A. Wollman   | Shashish is simple, it's discreet, it's brief. ... 
wollman@lcs.mit.edu  | Shashish is the bonding of hearts in spite of distance.
Opinions not those of| It is a bond more powerful than absence.  We like people
MIT, LCS, ANA, or NSA| who like Shashish.  - Claude McKenzie + Florent Vollant