On Fri, Mar 09, 2012, Frank Denis wrote: > Hi Matthew, > > Good catch. I'm going to fix that. > > On Mar 9, 2012, at 10:54 AM, Matthew Dempsky <matt...@dempsky.org> wrote: >> I briefly looked over this code, and the diff looks good to me except >> for one subtle FreeBSDism: memory writes done in a vfork(2)'d child >> process will not affect the parent process. This is critical for how >> FreeBSD's posix_spawn() propagates errors from the spawned child >> process.
I believe you may be able to just use rfork. If the parent waiting behavior of vfork is abslutely ocritical, we can add it to rfork very easily. I think that makes more sense than making userland jump through hoops.
