On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Irek Szczesniak <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 3:07 PM, David Korn <[email protected]> wrote: >> Subject: Re: Re: [uwin-users] uwin-users Digest, Vol 98, Issue 5 >> -------- >> >>> my guess is the uwin fork/exec code would run afoul of wine's emulation >>> that itself probably uses fork/exec and stands on its head trying to hide >>> that >> >> I don't know why this would be a problem assuming that the WINE >> emulation of CreateProcess() doesn't randomly lay out the address space. >> That means that two calls to CreateProcess() with the same arguments >> should put shared libraries at the same address. >> >> UWIN uses only WIN32 calls so that if WINE implements WIN32 faithfully, >> then in theory UWIN would work on WINE. > > Does posix.dll implement posix_spawn()? IMO a native posix_spawn() > implementation would avoid the trouble of a fork(), exec() sequence
Glenn? Irek _______________________________________________ uwin-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/uwin-users
