|
From: Jeremy F. <je...@go...> - 2005-01-17 03:18:44
|
On Sun, 2005-01-16 at 17:20 -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Currently, when the sys_clone wrapper sees a clone() which is actually a > fork, it ends up using the fork() syscall instead. However, this > doesn't do the extra things that clone() can do, like writing the parent > and/or child pid into memory, which is what this assert checks for. OK, I just checked in a fix for this, so give it a go. J |