Re: Happy child (w/10.2), gets SIGABRT (w/10.1)
Re: Happy child (w/10.2), gets SIGABRT (w/10.1)
- Subject: Re: Happy child (w/10.2), gets SIGABRT (w/10.1)
- From: Peter Lovell <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 23:07:30 -0500
On Monday, March 10, 2003, at 05:45 PM, Paul Ripke wrote:
What is said in "Design of the UNIX Operating System" is true, however,
as soon as your performFork() function returns, each process will have
its
own copy of "result". What's said in the book is that neither process
can
access the other processes *copy* of the variable.
Like I said, glad we could help, but I don't know what fixed it :)
Hi Lance,
I agree with Paul - the change you made isn't the real "fix". After the
fork, each process has its own space.
I don't know what "performFork()" is doing but I presume it's more
than just "fork()" as you check only for zero/nonzero.
Have you checked the possible return values from the child? Make sure
that your main() routine actually returns a proper exit value as that's
what will be passed back to the parent. I don't think that would have
caused the parent to think the child died with SIGABRT, but it is worth
checking. Don't let main() finish without exit().
Regards.....Peter
_______________________________________________
darwin-kernel mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/darwin-kernel
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.