From af0662f18cf4334a267397a71c3fdb3f4297f35f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thom Chiovoloni Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 15:01:12 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Note that posix_spawnp probably still does not work the way people may want --- src/doc/rustc/src/platform-support/apple-tvos.md | 8 +++++--- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/doc/rustc/src/platform-support/apple-tvos.md b/src/doc/rustc/src/platform-support/apple-tvos.md index 5a22402324c36..d87fd1959b49c 100644 --- a/src/doc/rustc/src/platform-support/apple-tvos.md +++ b/src/doc/rustc/src/platform-support/apple-tvos.md @@ -39,9 +39,11 @@ missing or incomplete support: - `std::process::Command`'s API will return an error if it is configured in a manner which cannot be performed using `posix_spawn` -- this is because the more flexible `fork`/`exec`-based approach is prohibited on these platforms in - favor of `posix_spawn{,p}`. A concrete set of cases where this will occur is - difficult to enumerate (and would quickly become stale), but in some cases it - may be worked around by tweaking the manner in which `Command` is invoked. + favor of `posix_spawn{,p}` (which still probably will get you rejected from + app stores, so is likely sideloading-only). A concrete set of cases where this + will occur is difficult to enumerate (and would quickly become stale), but in + some cases it may be worked around by tweaking the manner in which `Command` + is invoked. ## Building the target