Extend faq.using to discuss fork failures

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Aug 19 10:41, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 09:43:10AM -0400, Ryan Johnson wrote:
> >4. If you have access to the source code of the offending application 
> >(this applies to all cygwin packages), consider replacing calls to 
> >fork() with calls to the spawn family of functions. These are a native 
> >(= reliable and highly efficient) replacement for fork+exec, which is by 
> >far the most common usage of fork(), and are documented at 
> >http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/20y988d2%28v=VS.100%29.aspx.
> [...]
> And, again, we don't want to tell people to use non-POSIX solutions
> except as a last resort.  Telling people to rewrite their source code
> flies in the face of what Cygwin is trying to do.

Oh boy, I missed that part.  Yes, I agree fully with your point of view.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat