Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!auspex!guy
From: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: vfork()
Keywords: vfork()
Message-ID: <6834@auspex.auspex.com>
Date: 26 Mar 91 19:23:28 GMT
References: <8372@rsiatl.Dixie.Com> <15533@smoke.brl.mil> <1135@pemcom.pem-stuttgart.de>
Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara
Lines: 16

>That is PARTLY right. vfork differs from fork in a way that it doesn't
>copy the complete process data range, so the child of a vfork can ONLY
>do an exec, execlp etc. 

That's precisely what Doug was referring to; either the application
*doesn't* depend on the fact that, in most if not all current
implementations, "vfork()" causes the parent and child to temporarily
share an address space, in which case the original poster can just
replace the "vfork()" calls with "fork()", or it *does* depend on that,
in which case it will probably require a fair bit of rewhacking in order
to work....

(And if it does depend on that, the author of the application is hereby
asked "Didn't your 'vfork()' manual page tell you not to do that? 
Berkeley's version of the 'vfork()' manual page sure as hell tells you
not to....")