>macOS is XP_UNIX. Yes, but nsIProcess uses XP_MACOSX for separate impl as you described later. > I think we could add a flag to LaunchOptions for creating a background task, as described in comment #2; 👍, I'll try writing a patch. >on the Unix side I think we'd implement it by double-forking Does Unix need anything more here though? This bug exists because of Windows-only [`JOB_OBJECT_LIMIT_KILL_ON_JOB_CLOSE`](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/0a2eba79c24300ce0539f91c1bebac2e75264e58/browser/app/winlauncher/LauncherProcessWin.cpp#100), I believe other platforms are fine.
Bug 1794581 Comment 5 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
>macOS is XP_UNIX. Yes, but nsIProcess uses XP_MACOSX for separate impl as you described later. > I think we could add a flag to LaunchOptions for creating a background task, as described in comment #2; 👍, I'll try writing a patch. >on the Unix side I think we'd implement it by double-forking Does Unix need anything more here though? This bug exists because of Windows-only [`JOB_OBJECT_LIMIT_KILL_ON_JOB_CLOSE`](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/0a2eba79c24300ce0539f91c1bebac2e75264e58/browser/app/winlauncher/LauncherProcessWin.cpp#100), I believe other platforms are fine. In other words, I don't want to wait for background tasks.
>macOS is XP_UNIX. Yes, but nsIProcess uses XP_MACOSX for separate impl as you described later. > I think we could add a flag to LaunchOptions for creating a background task, as described in comment #2; 👍, I'll try writing a patch. >on the Unix side I think we'd implement it by double-forking Does Unix need anything more here though? This bug exists because of Windows-only [`JOB_OBJECT_LIMIT_KILL_ON_JOB_CLOSE`](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/rev/0a2eba79c24300ce0539f91c1bebac2e75264e58/browser/app/winlauncher/LauncherProcessWin.cpp#100), I believe other platforms are fine. In other words, I don't want to wait for background task processes.