From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
Date: 2009-06-10T23:41:37+09:00
Subject: Re: inheriting socket in child process on Windows

2009/6/10  <knutaf@gmail.com>:

> True, I did realize after I posted that perhaps my way isn't the "most
> obvious." In any case, I'd very much like to avoid requiring cygwin
> for this to work. Plus, with cygwin, I would guess my original Linux
> approach would probably work without modification.

I don't understand the "plus".  Why is that an additional reason to
not want to work with cygwin?

> Finally, after testing it out briefly, I don't think fork will work in
> my situation. I didn't give enough context originally,

Aha!

> but I'm
> spawning the new child process in order for it to be the same process
> as the parent, but having picked up any code changes that have been
> made. A "live reboot", if you will. Fork doesn't seem to re-interpret
> the source.

fork() just copies the process - with all open file descriptors etc.
My understanding of Windows internals is limited but I do believe that
there is no direct equivalent function. It may be that the pattern
does not work on "plain" Windows.

Kind regards

robert


-- 
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/