[reply inline, see below]

On 3/27/25 1:02 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Thu, 27 Mar 2025 12:45:14 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote:

Gil wrote, in part:
Shame om IBM.  They implemented vfork on CMS Opem, but
fraudlently named it "fork".
Yeah, when the did that, at the next SHARE I handed out Taco Bell sporks with labels that 
said "VM OpenEdition fork". Even the IBMers seemed to think it was funny.

They could have been ethical:
<https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9799919799/functions/posix_spawn.html#tag_17_388>
     o Swapping is generally too slow for a realtime environment.
     o Dynamic address translation is not available everywhere that POSIX might 
be useful.
     o Processes are too useful to simply option out of POSIX whenever
          it must run without address translation or other MMU services.


There is a group (no idea how large*) who have ported Unix** to several 8-bit processors. Now, Unix on an old XT I do remember. That was a commercial product. But imagine Unix on your TRS-80. (This is NOT a joke.)
The project is called FUZIX.

*the group is presently headed by Alan Cox, former second-in-command under Linus Torvalds.

**I say "Unix" to mean the basic operation as is common practice. Not aware that they're following any actual standards. They're certainly NOT using any actual Unix code.

Anyway ... yeah "not available everywhere that POSIX might be useful".
Dunno what FUZIX are doing with fork().


--
-- R; <><

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to