fork on nommu

Mike Frysinger vapier at
Fri Feb 15 23:10:32 UTC 2008

On Thursday 07 February 2008, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 10:40:57PM +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> > A number of programs, such as busybox, contain calls to fork which may
> > not necessarily get executed at runtime.  On nommu systems, this
> > currently produces link errors since the function doesn't exist.
> >
> > In our Blackfin tree, we use the following patch (by Mike IIRC) to
> > convert the link error into a warning.  Any objections to installing
> > this?

err, not quite ... you added fork() as a stub for no-mmu and i complained 
about it existing at all, but then just added the link warning so that it 
wouldnt go completely unnoticed.

> FWIW, I think the link error is more useful than a stub version.  Most
> programs don't handle fork failure gracefully.

i'd agree.  i dont think ive seen code yet that handles the case where fork() 
is not actually implemented other than simply aborting.  the code may as not 
exist if fork() doesnt exist.

the default mainline no-mmu build should not have a fork() symbol ... whether 
we want to add a config option for no-mmu "Add stubs for unimplemented 
symbols" to control this and things like daemon() would be ok i think
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : 

More information about the uClibc mailing list