Hi,

KatolaZ wrote:
<<
but when somebody writes to a ML asking for suggestions on a
topic I usually assume that s/he really wants to receive some
information on that topic
>>

Thanks to this mailing thread, I now understand what fork() actually
does. To me fork() looks much more than simply a function that does
some processing returning a result as it looks more like an
instruction directed at the kernel scheduler to split the process into
a parent and child that are not equal in all respects. Furthermore,
fork() returns the child pid for the parent while it return 0 for the
child process. fork() is the point after which execution in the child
continues. This means, the child process does not start from the very
beginning of the code but from just after fork(). Using the return
value of fork() for the condition in an if statement provides
different execution paths for the parent and child as is the case in
Felker's init.

Sorry to "look like a troll". This impression is worrying me as it is
not a true picture of what I am although I am far from the ideal
person on Earth. Due to past misfortunes, my memory is not the same
photographic memory that used to be. However, should this sole
defiency be the yardstick of whether I code or not? My survival
instinct tells me to press on, which I will do...

Edward

On 14/06/2016, KatolaZ <katolaz@???> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 10:59:05AM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
>> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:50:37 +0200
>> Irrwahn <irrwahn@???> wrote:
>>
>> > We could play this game day in, day out for months or even
>> > years, without having you grasp the basics necessary to
>> > fully understand the implications of even moderately
>> > sophisticated C programs.
>>
>> This discussion is getting theoretical, so allow me to discuss my
>> theories...
>>
>> I think Edward's being sucked into a vortex of basics at lightning
>> speed, and within a couple weeks will know as much about the basics
>> necessary for Felker PID1 as you do (which would be twice what I know,
>> I found your explanation really hit the spot). Different people learn
>> differently: Perhaps Edward learns much faster from doing than from
>> reading or receiving instruction. If he ends up in the same place, we
>> have one more knowledgeable person in the group.
>>
>
> I would humbly note that we are where we are because a band of people
> started rewriting the linux low-level user-space before having a real
> clue of what they were up to.
>
> Having said that, I agree that different people have different ways to
> learn, but when somebody writes to a ML asking for suggestions on a
> topic I usually assume that s/he really wants to receive some
> information on that topic, and not just a "oh, look, the best way is
> for you to try whatever comes to your mind, and you will get this done
> sooner or later, just by chance". If I don't need help, I just don't
> ask for help.
>
> HND
>
> KatolaZ
>

> --
> [ ~.,_  Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ - GLUGCT -- Freaknet Medialab  ]
> [     "+.  katolaz [at] freaknet.org --- katolaz [at] yahoo.it  ]
> [       @)   http://kalos.mine.nu ---  Devuan GNU + Linux User  ]
> [     @@)  http://maths.qmul.ac.uk/~vnicosia --  GPG: 0B5F062F  ]
> [ (@@@)  Twitter: @KatolaZ - skype: katolaz -- github: KatolaZ  ]
> _______________________________________________
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@???
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

>