From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Thu Apr 7 21:33:16 2005 X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Subject: Re: [MiNT] MMU usage in MiNT, fork/mmap From: "Evan K. Langlois" To: MiNT Mailing List In-Reply-To: References: <1112841566.22639.7.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Cool Running Concepts Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 14:30:25 -0500 Message-Id: <1112902227.31903.3.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - esc14.midphase.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - fishpool.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - CoolRunningConcepts.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: Evan@CoolRunningConcepts.com Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.9 tagged_above=-50.5 required=7.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00 X-Spam-Level: On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 09:16 +0200, Frank Naumann wrote: > A proper fork() is for sure possible. It's just not very efficient (that's > why shell scripts (for example configure) are so slow (they use heavily > fork()). I assume it does a copy of the entire parent's address space .. but what about pointers in the parent? Wouldn't they point to the parent's memory and not the child? Or is there some method of fixing that? -- Evan