[BusyBox] Re: [patch] Why busybox xargs is broken.

Glenn McGrath bug1 at optushome.com.au
Fri Oct 3 23:32:04 UTC 2003

On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 15:32:14 -0500
Rob Landley <rob at landley.net> wrote:

> Alright, would somebody please tell me what the difference between
> "vfork" and "fork" is?  I've wondered for years. The man page on vfork
> doesn't give you any useful information, it just repeats "use fork
> instead, infidel!" about five hundred times and then goes on to insult
> vfork's ancestry.  (Really!  Go read it!)
> It goes out of its way to avoid giving any information about why linux
> bothered to implement it, or why one might actually want to use it...

(im not an expert at it, but as far as i know)

The v in vfork stands for virtual, vfork just simulates a fork, fork
needs a MMU which is a requirement for linux, but not for uClinux.

uClinux is targeted for use on embeded systems, which is also the
territory for busybox, so it makes sense that busybox try not to require
a MMU.


More information about the busybox mailing list