> IMO this patch has been rushed in and should be reverted for now.
> It's still not async-signal safe, had typos, plus this problem noted
> by Victor.

That's not really a problem. You merely have to *perturb* the random
state in the parent, so that the next child gets a different initial
state. As pointed out in a mailing-list message, mixing in a constant
could be enough to perturb the state.

As for not being async-signal safe, it's only in the double fork()
case, which is much less of an issue IMO.