[M3devel] 5.8.6 LINUXLIBC6 breakage, kernel 2.6.23, glibc-2.6-4
Tony Hosking
hosking at cs.purdue.edu
Thu Apr 21 16:30:25 CEST 2011
I'm not familiar with the architecture of CVSup.
On Apr 21, 2011, at 10:28 AM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 10:20:54AM -0400, Tony Hosking wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 21, 2011, at 9:19 AM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:58:06AM -0400, Tony Hosking wrote:
>>>> Agreed. But CVSup used it and we were trying to be supportive.
>>>
>>> So, at present, CVSup presumably works with user threads.
>>> Maybe the cure is to fix CVSup instead of fork().
>>>
>>> Why does CVSup needs a fork() that preserves all threads? Is
>>> it essential to its design, or incidental?
>>
>> CVSup uses fork in an ill-defined way. fork is only well-defined for use as fork+exec. So, the fact that there are continuing threads is immaterial. CVSup wants to continue doing real work (without exec) after fork.
>
> Does it need to use fork() at all? Wuld it suffice to use Modula 3's
> own thread system?
>
> -- hendrik
More information about the M3devel
mailing list