optimizing fork/exec in vendor source
Sat Oct 11 04:53:00 GMT 2008
On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 12:50:03PM +1100, Jack Andrews wrote:
>On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 1:26 AM, Christopher Faylor <cgf-XXXXXXXXX> wrote:
There is no reason to include my email address in the body of your
message. That's what email headers are for.
>>>this seems to be an easy problem in cygwin (at least, in comparison to
>>>fork). and would fix one of the biggest problems with cygwin (or at
>>>least cygwin bash). who has to hold the copyright?
>> It is not an "easy problem" and there are no guarantees that it would
>> fix anything.
>i'm naive when it comes to cygwin internals, but the obvious similarity
>of posix_spawn to CreateProcess is seductive. can you give me an
>example of one of the difficulties of implementing posix_spawn in
>cygwin so i don't bother the list anymore?
Sorry, but no.
You have this backwards. If you are going to be making suggestions, you
should be educating yourself and speaking from knowledge rather than
suggesting that problems are "easy" and then asking someone to prove why
they are not.
It is by no means impossible to implement the POSIX spawn functions but
implementing them fully would require quite a bit of work and you'd still
run into Windows limitations. You can either take my word for it or
study the subject yourself. I'm not going to educate you.
The particular code that you probably would want to study is in fork.cc
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
More information about the Cygwin