Review request for 5049299

Martin Buchholz martinrb at
Sat Jun 6 02:13:07 UTC 2009


I think the best way to handle the coordination is in two steps.
I'd like to get my Linux-clone changes in first (you should review,
I will commit)
and then we switch hats and I will review your Solaris changes.
It seems best to do this in two steps: to better place blame when
it breaks (this is very tricky stuff to get right).
If you agree, please review my posted changes.

Aside: Instead of griping about the missing execvpe,
I filed a bug against glibc, and was surprised to find
that Ulrich Drepper had implemented it a couple of days later.
It will probably be in glibc-2.11.  Perhaps in 5 years we can
use it ourselves...).  Thanks, Uli!


On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 07:29, Michael McMahon <Michael.McMahon at>wrote:

> Martin,
> I had done something similar with clone & exec for Linux, but hadn't got
> round to testing it.
> So, it seems reasonable to take yours. Do you want to send me your updated
> versions of
> process_md.c and the test? I can take care of the merge with the Solaris
> code.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list