Hacker News Reader

As I understand it, the whole purpose of vfork is to avoid that problem. So vfork does not copy memory in any way and you're not allowed to do anything but exec after vfork. But at this point question arises: why not call it `vfork_and_exec` and get rid of undefined behaviour. Or choose better name like `CreateProcessW` hehe

View on HN

In the manpage for vfork, Linux in particular

> As with fork(2), the child process created by vfork() inherits copies of various of the caller's process attributes (e.g., file descriptors, signal dispositions, and current working directory); the vfork() call differs only in the treatment of the virtual address space, as described above.

so it seems Linux does define the behavior of vfork, but if you rely on it, your code won't be portable to other POSIX systems

https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/vfork.2.html

Reply on news.ycombinator.com