This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-patches
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [PATCH 0/6] Protect fork() against dll- and exe-updates.
- From: Michael Haubenwallner <michael dot haubenwallner at ssi-schaefer dot com>
- To: cygwin-patches at cygwin dot com
- Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 21:03:52 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Protect fork() against dll- and exe-updates.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Newsgroups: gmane.os.cygwin.patches
- References: <1459364024-24891-1-git-send-email-michael dot haubenwallner at ssi-schaefer dot com> <56FC211E dot 4030204 at dancol dot org>
On 03/30/2016 08:55 PM, Daniel Colascione wrote:
>
>
> On 03/30/2016 11:53 AM, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> this is the updated and split series of patches to use hardlinks
>> for creating the child process by fork(), in reply to
>> https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-developers/2016-01/msg00002.html
>> https://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-developers/2016-03/msg00005.html
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.os.cygwin.devel/1378
>>
>> Thanks for review!
>> /haubi/
>>
>>
>
> Creating a new process now requires a write operation on the filesystem
> hosting the binary? Seriously? I don't think that's worth it no matter
> the other benefits.
>
Only if the original binaries necessary to create the new child process
by fork() are not available any more - and the /var/run/cygfork/
directory does exist and is on NTFS. I do prefer a working fork() even
when updating dlls and executables while the parent process is running.
/haubi/