Re: [REQUEST FOR VOTES] snmpd: Drop support for pass_persist on uClinux

On Sun, Sep 06, 2020 at 07:34:57PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 2020-08-18 10:28, Magnus Fromreide wrote:
> > I think the child code in the vfork case should be exactly
> > 
> >         execv(argv[0], argv);
> >         _exit(1);
> > 
> > as that seems to be about what POSIX allows.
> > 
> >        (From  POSIX.1)  The  vfork()  function has the same effect as fork(2),
> >        except that the behavior is undefined if the process created by vfork()
> >        either
> >          modifies  any  data other than a variable of type pid_t used to
> >          store the return value from vfork(), or
> > 
> > 	 returns from  the  function  in which  vfork()  was called, or
> > 
> > 	 calls any other function before successfully calling _exit(2) or
> > 	 one of the exec(3) family of functions.
> > 
> > Yes, vfork is quite limited.
> 
> Feel free to take a look at commit 8fabe044e316f9ecda53148d9afeaf5e5854bb1a.

This looks nice, thanks.

/MF