tih@uunet.uu.net (01/24/89)
I've been wondering: Is there a good reason why cron does a fork and exit, other than to permit it to be started as "cron", and not "cron &"? The way it's done now, the initial invocation of cron, which dies after the fork, leaves a hole in memory. This seems to me like a bad idea in a system where our 640 kilobytes need to be conserved as much as possible... -tih ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom Ivar Helbekkmo ..!mcvax!ndosl!melkart!tih Fredrik Meltzers gt 11 Standard thelbekk@norunit.bitnet N-5007 Bergen disclaimers helbekkmo@nhh.uninett NORWAY apply... Phone: +47-5-960561 MS-DOS & OS/2? Just say NO! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------