Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] fork/exec patch

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> [moved to hackers / win32]
>
> Claudio Natoli wrote:
>
> >Or do people have strong leanings towards "fix as you go along"? Just feels
> >like that way could see us getting bogged down making things "perfect"
> >instead of advancing the port...
> >
> >
> >
>
> w.r.t. Win32, I think the way to proceed is (in this order):
> . make it work
> . make it elegant
> . make it fast
>
> BTW, I agree with Bruce, you're doing excellent stuff. Now for the fun
> part (signals).

Actually, no. I thought fork/exec would be a real mess (as did Tom),
but Claudio has done an excellent job of producing a minimal patch. The
work isn't done yet, but this small patch has taken us much closer, so I
assume signals will be even easier.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073