Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!sun-barr!ccut!titcca!cc.titech.ac.jp!necom830!mohta
From: mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp (Masataka Ohta)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: vfork (was Re: Paging page tables)
Message-ID: <5893@titcce.cc.titech.ac.jp>
Date: 19 Jul 90 07:28:01 GMT
References: <920@dgis.dtic.dla.mil> <5830@titcce.cc.titech.ac.jp> <5DL4SPD@xds13.ferranti.com> <5855@titcce.cc.titech.ac.jp> <Q=M4GG5@xds13.ferranti.com>
Sender: news@cc.titech.ac.jp
Organization: Tokyo Institute of Technology
Lines: 23

In article <Q=M4GG5@xds13.ferranti.com>
	peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:

>However, there are any number of "rational definitions of spawn", since
>outside of UNIX it is about the only process creation primitive that
>exists.

In spite of my request to actually show a "rational definition of spawn",
no one has ever shown it.

So, you lose.

The conclusion is:

	no rational definition of spwan exists.

>It would be redundant for me to duplicate any
>particular definition here.

No, thank you. I am bored of many complex, ugly and wrong definitions of
spawn.

						Masataka Ohta