Re: Per-descriptor state

[Robert Swindells <rjs%fdy2.co.uk@localhost>]

David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote:
>On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 09:44:49AM -0400, Mouse wrote:
> > > Close-on-fork is apparently either coming or already here, not sure
> > > which, but it's also per-descriptor.
> > 
> > I should probably add that here, then, though use cases will likely be
> > rare.  I can think of only one program I wrote where it'd be useful; I
> > created a "close these fds post-fork" data structure internally.
>
>I can't think of any at all; to begin with it's limited to forks that
>don't exec, and unless just using it for convenience as you're
>probably suggesting, it only applies when also using threads, and if
>one's using threads why is one also using forks? So it seems like it's
>limited to badly designed libraries that want to fork behind the
>caller's back instead of setting up their forks at initialization
>time. Or something.

Or it is needed for a little used application called Firefox.