Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ucbvax!cs.umass.EDU!HELLER
From: HELLER@cs.umass.EDU.UUCP
Newsgroups: mod.computers.68k
Subject: Questions about the use of fork()
Message-ID: <8703202251.AA29342@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: Thu, 19-Mar-87 10:46:00 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.8703202251.AA29342
Posted: Thu Mar 19 10:46:00 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 22-Mar-87 17:06:58 EST
Sender: mwm@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Distribution: world
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 22
Approved: info-68k@ucbvax.berkeley.edu

I have some random questions about the use of fork().

Are there reasons for using fork() other than ones having to do with certian
limitations of UNIX, such as lack of asynchronious I/O and process creation
parameters to functions like execv() et. al. (things like priority and I/O
binding)? I am curious to know whether there really is any reason for trying
to implement a UNIX-style fork() in an O/S like OS-9/68K or CDOS-68K. That
is if the various non-fork() type subprocess creating functions had the
nesscesary additional arguments and the I/O system provided some sort of
user-accessable asynchronious I/O access, would a UNIX-style fork() still be
neccessary or usefull for anything?

		Robert Heller
ARPANet:	Heller@UMass-CS.CSNET
BITNET:		Heller@UMass.BITNET
BIX:		Heller
GEnie:		RHeller
FidoNet:	101/27 (Dave's Fido, Gardner, MA)
	     or 101/147 (Orange Fido, Orange, MA)
CompuServe	71450,3432
Local PV VAXen:	COINS::HELLER
UCC Cyber/DG:	Heller@CS