Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcsun!ukc!stc!kings!lls
From: lls@kings.co.uk (Lady Lodge Systems)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Is System V.4 fork reliable?
Message-ID: <32@kings.co.uk>
Date: 13 Jul 90 15:50:43 GMT
References: <561@oglvee.UUCP>
Reply-To: lls@kings.UUCP (Superuser)
Organization: King Bros
Lines: 23

In article <561@oglvee.UUCP> jr@oglvee.UUCP (Jim Rosenberg) writes:
>Somewhere along in the development of System V, fork became an unreliable
>system call....
>...
>The number of utilities that both use fork and also understand that under
>some circumstances it ought to be *retried* if it fails is pitifully small.
>(The shell simply reports the bogus message "No more processes"...

Or if you are using the command substitute construct (...`run cmd`...)
and the Bourne shell cannot fork it simply hangs.  No retry, No Error
just a full stop!  Sheesh!  if the shell is broken about retrying forks,
is it any wonder that most other programs are as well?

>My question is:  Is this *FIXED* in V.4?

Damned Good Question!
-- 
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Peter King.                          | Voice: +44 733 239445            |
| King Bros (Lady Lodge) Ltd           | EMAIL: root@kings.co.uk          |
| Lady Lodge House, Orton Longueville, | UUCP: ...mcvax!ukc!kings!root    |
| Peterborough, PE2 0HZ, England.      |                                  |
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------