Re: [boost] [gsoc] Boost.Process done

Subject: Re: [boost] [gsoc] Boost.Process done
From: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard (jeremy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-09-09 21:25:57

On 08/30/2010 11:59 AM, Boris Schaeling wrote:

 > [snip]

> I checked now why I even had to add -lpthread if it wasn't required in
> earlier Boost.Process drafts: The new status class uses a worker thread
> to support asynchronous I/O. So yes, threading=multi is the natural
> choice. ;) Updated in SVN and in the ZIP file.

The use of a worker thread seems like an unfortunate additional burden. 
  I don't know about the Windows implementation, but on Linux it seems 
in principle it should be possible to handle it via a SIGCHLD handler.