[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: First version of MinGW octave
From: |
John W. Eaton |
Subject: |
Re: First version of MinGW octave |
Date: |
Wed, 15 Feb 2006 12:03:22 -0500 |
On 15-Feb-2006, David Bateman wrote:
| However, fork is but it can be approximated with CreateProcess, though
| the cost will be higher as I think more of the process table is copied...
I don't think the Cygwin fork does any better. As far as I know, it
copies the complete parent process when creating the child.
Yes, you could probably implement fork for mingw, but then I think you
would be starting down the path of reinventing Cygwin for mingw.
jwe
- Re: First version of MinGW octave, (continued)
- Re: First version of MinGW octave, David Bateman, 2006/02/15
- Re: First version of MinGW octave, John W. Eaton, 2006/02/15
- Re: First version of MinGW octave, Shai Ayal, 2006/02/15
- Re: First version of MinGW octave, John W. Eaton, 2006/02/15
- Re: First version of MinGW octave, John Swensen, 2006/02/15
- Re: First version of MinGW octave, Paul Kienzle, 2006/02/15
- Re: First version of MinGW octave, Shai Ayal, 2006/02/15
- Re: First version of MinGW octave, Paul Kienzle, 2006/02/16
- Re: First version of MinGW octave, Paul Kienzle, 2006/02/15
- Message not available
- Re: First version of MinGW octave, David Bateman, 2006/02/15
- Re: First version of MinGW octave,
John W. Eaton <=
- Re: First version of MinGW octave, Paul Kienzle, 2006/02/15
Re: First version of MinGW octave, Bill Denney, 2006/02/16
Message not available