Skip to content

Conversation

@Kusekushi
Copy link
Contributor

@Kusekushi Kusekushi commented Nov 8, 2025

This should close #1483 unless other flags are deemed neccessary/useful.

For flags refer to https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=rfork&sektion=2
This implements

  • RFPROC (not really, we just check if this is present to be somewhat BSD compatible)
  • RFNOWAIT
  • RFFDG
  • RFCFDG

@github-actions github-actions bot added the 👀 pr-needs-review PR needs review from a maintainer or community member label Nov 8, 2025
@spholz
Copy link
Member

spholz commented Nov 8, 2025

I don't think we need this syscall. Especially since we have a posix_spawn syscall.
I'm generally not really a fan of clone()/rfork().

Is there any reason why you adding this syscall? We generally don't add such features without anything using it.

@Hendiadyoin1
Copy link
Contributor

apart from spholz' comment, this seems to contain a small bit of refactoring, which -as separate commits-
may be nice to have on their own, and will make this generally more reviewable when separated

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Nov 29, 2025

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 7 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions!

@stale stale bot added the stale label Nov 29, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

👀 pr-needs-review PR needs review from a maintainer or community member stale

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Implement rfork()

3 participants