Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!att!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!wuarchive!texbell!uhnix1!sugar!ficc!peter
From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: fork/exec
Message-ID: <5696@ficc.uu.net>
Date: 15 Aug 89 17:08:21 GMT
References: <148@trigon.UUCP> <207600029@s.cs.uiuc.edu> <941@lakesys.UUCP> <1989Aug15.012607.4529@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Lines: 19

In article <1989Aug15.012607.4529@utzoo.uucp>, henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
> On the hardware used by VMS and RSX, it is verifiably possible to implement
> fork(), since Unix runs on those machines.

True. It's probably possible to implement fork() on the 8051-class chip
in your typical microwave oven. But quite irrelevant to the question of
using Posix as a way to fill in the gaps outside the scope of the C standard.

> (That chortling sound you hear is all the Unix old-timers watching the
> frantic scramble for Unix compatibility by all the people who spent
> years sneering at Unix.  Nyah nyah, we told you so!  :-) :-) :-))

I *am* a UNIX old-timer, Henry.  I'm just a little less parochial than
some.
-- 
Peter da Silva, Xenix Support, Ferranti International Controls Corporation.
Business: peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180. | "The sentence I am now
Personal: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com.   `-_-' |  writing is the sentence
Quote: Have you hugged your wolf today?  'U`  |  you are now reading"