Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 16:34:43 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com>
Cc: manfred@colorfullife.com, drepper@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] per-user signal pending and message queue limits
Message-Id: <20040420163443.7347da48.akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <20040420231351.GB13826@logos.cnet>
References: <20040419212810.GB10956@logos.cnet>
	<20040419224940.GY31589@devserv.devel.redhat.com>
	<20040420141319.GB13259@logos.cnet>
	<20040420130439.23fae566.akpm@osdl.org>
	<20040420231351.GB13826@logos.cnet>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 879
Lines: 23

Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com> wrote:
>
> > The major advantage of your work is that we can now remove those limits. 
> > You'll be needing a 2.4 backport ;)
> 
> Yeap. :) 
> 
> And we also need to do the userspace part. ulimit is part of bash, so 
> probably all shell's should be awared of this? I never looked
> how "ulimit" utility works.

yup, the shells need to be changed, which is really awkward.  I was wrong
about how bash and zsh handle `ulimit 4 1024'.

Really the shells _should_ permit ulimit-by-number for this very reason.

Adding new ulimits is nice - it's a shame that the shells make it hard to
use.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/