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"