On Mon, 9 Apr 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

quoted text
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2007, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> > 
> > Maybe "struct posix_process" is more descriptive?  "struct process_posix"?
> > "Ugly POSIX process semantics data" seems simple enough to stick in a struct
> > name.  "struct uglyposix_process"?
> 
> Guys, you didn't read my message.
> 
> It's *not* about "process" stuff.  Anything that tries to call it a 
> "process" is *by*definition* worse than what it is now. Processes have all 
> the things that we've cleanly separated out for filesystem, VM, SysV 
> semaphore state, namespaces etc.
> 
> The "struct signal_struct" is the random *leftovers* from all the other 
> stuff. It's *not* about "processes". Never has been, and never will be. 

I proposed "struct task_shared_ctx" but you ducked :)


- Davide


-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/