Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!caen!math.lsa.umich.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!nuchat!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: forks Message-ID: <7058@sugar.hackercorp.com> Date: 16 Nov 90 13:37:39 GMT References: <2478@trlluna.trl.oz> <15900@cbmvax.commodore.com> Reply-To: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Organization: Sugar Land Unix - Houston Lines: 13 In article <15900@cbmvax.commodore.com> jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup) writes: > Even this won't work unless you have a single-tasked kernal (for > example, if the I/O driver might wait for a seek, and you let another task run, > the memory area to be read/written might now be occupied by the other process.) > Therefore you can't use this method to fork() on the Amiga under AmigaDos, > though AmigaMinix can (and does) use it. Well, if you work through a posix.library that does reads and writes through a buffer pool, like in UNIX, then you could still use fork(). This just becomes another thing to watch out for... it's not a show stopper. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' .