Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!rutgers!mcnc!ramona!andrew From: andrew@ramona.Cary.NC.US (Andrew Ernest) Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.programmer Subject: Re: why os/2 doesn't have fork() Summary: multiple data segments are NOT the reason Message-ID: <1991Mar30.182149.106671@ramona.Cary.NC.US> Date: 30 Mar 91 18:21:49 GMT References: <39443@ubvax.UB.Com> <1991Mar29.141629.9239@hubcap.clemson.edu> Lines: 10 In article <1991Mar29.141629.9239@hubcap.clemson.edu> ibmman@eng.clemson.edu ((the) IBMMAN) writes: >I have never heard of one, and I think it would be extremely difficult to >write one due to the fact that there can be multiple data segments. I'm I don't know the reason why os/2 doesn't have fork() but it ISN'T because there are multiple data segments. Although they are now obsolete, there used to be UNIX systems which ran on 80286 systems. These systems allocated a new segment each time you called sbrk(). They had no problems with fork(). -- Andrew Ernest