Re: posix_spawn(2) (Was: Re: [Fwd: Re: execv bug???])
Re: posix_spawn(2) (Was: Re: [Fwd: Re: execv bug???])
- Subject: Re: posix_spawn(2) (Was: Re: [Fwd: Re: execv bug???])
- From: "Clark Cox" <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 04:12:41 -0800
On 1/28/08, Steve Checkoway <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> On Jan 27, 2008, at 7:23 PM, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
>
> > In another couple of releases, posix_spawn(2) will also hopefully
> > be far enough in our rear view mirrors that developers can
> > standardize on it.
>
>
> I've been curious, what are the advantages to using posix_spawn(2)
> instead of fork(2) + execve(2)?
One main benefit, as I see it, is that posix_spawn avoids the address
space duplication implied by fork, which can be quite a time-waster
when all you're going to do is blow that space away with an exec.
--
Clark S. Cox III
email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden