Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:32191 comp.unix.programmer:94
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mephisto!prism!gt0178a
From: gt0178a@prism.gatech.EDU (BURNS,JIM)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: shared memory
Message-ID: <14140@hydra.gatech.EDU>
Date: 26 Sep 90 10:31:39 GMT
References: <13991@hydra.gatech.EDU>
Followup-To: comp.lang.c
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology
Lines: 17

in article <13991@hydra.gatech.EDU>, gt0178a@prism.gatech.EDU (BURNS,JIM) says:
[deleted]

In my above reply, for some reason, it got marked as Followup:
comp.lang.c, which is NOT what I intended. I don't normally read that
group, but I suscribed to it just to find out if my question at the end of
that post got answered, and it didn't. So one more time:

HP-UX documents it; it tests out on A/UX 1.1 and Ultrix 4.0 : the first
call to shmat() (by any process) automatically zeroes out the shm seg, so
explicit initialization is NOT necessary. Is this standard? Which one?

-- 
BURNS,JIM
Georgia Institute of Technology, Box 30178, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt0178a
Internet: gt0178a@prism.gatech.edu