Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!mcsun!sunic!kth.se!draken!d88-skl From: d88-skl@nada.kth.se (Stellan Klebom) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: (Re: A REAL fork() function (was Re: SKsh weirdness)) Message-ID: <3041@draken.nada.kth.se> Date: 28 Feb 90 18:15:25 GMT Reply-To: d88-skl@nada.kth.se (Stellan Klebom) Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden Lines: 36 In article <13920050@hpfelg.HP.COM> koren@hpfelg.HP.COM (Steve Koren) writes: [ stuff deleted ] >I do suspect that SKsh will run with less stack than I recommend. >However, there is one point which is a little unclear to me. In AmigaDos, >when you run another program (*not* in the background) from yours, >the second program runs using the same process as the parent. Does >this mean that it uses the same stack space, as well? I'm not sure. >I can't find that documented anywhere, so I always recommend more stack >than should be necessary. Feel free to try less; if it works for you, >great. > > - steve [ stuff deleted ] I have read an article in the German Amiga Magazine, issue 12 1988, containing a program listing that they claim runs a program syncronusly in the same way as the shell does. The article claims that the program is based on a disassebly of the CLI. That program allocates a new stack for the child. So if one can trust that listing, the answer to your question is: No the child doesn't use the parent's stack. Stellan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: UUNET: d88-skl@nada.kth.se * #include UUCP: uunet!sunic!nada!d88-skl * * You'll never now, tomorrow Mail: Stellan Klebom * may be cancelled! Axvaegen 6 * S-175 44 JAERFAELLA * (Yet another intelligent SWEDEN * statement) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------