Re: Notification of fork()
Re: Notification of fork()
- Subject: Re: Notification of fork()
- From: "Curtis Jones" <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 14:50:50 -0500
On 12/26/06, Michael Smith <email@hidden> wrote:
The kernel's "permanent memory" is completely full of bits of the
kernel, so wherever it might go that ain't it.
After looking into it some more, I was going to try to avoid that
approach anyway. It looks promising, but also not so much a viable
short-term solution.
So, even if the incoming connection does not have a pid associated
with it (at the time that I need to know the pid), I do know the
associated local port, and I can look at the existing listeners and
find the one that corresponds, and I know the pid that created the
listener (even if it is not the one that is calling accept). So, in
some cases I'll have the correct pid/path, and in other cases I'll
have just one value or neither.
Not ideal, but it'll have to do until I can find a way to know about
fork()'ing activity.
--
Curtis Jones
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-kernel mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden