Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 20:03:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 20:03:39 -0500 Received: from sith.mimuw.edu.pl ([193.0.97.1]:22276 "HELO sith.mimuw.edu.pl") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 20:03:28 -0500 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 01:34:59 +0100 From: Jan Rekorajski To: Alan Cox Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] no RLIMIT_NPROC for root, please Message-ID: <20001129013459.B20515@sith.mimuw.edu.pl> Mail-Followup-To: Jan Rekorajski , Alan Cox , torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20001128214309.F2680@sith.mimuw.edu.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk on Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 09:54:00PM +0000 X-Operating-System: Linux 2.4.0-test11-pre6 i686 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 28 Nov 2000, Alan Cox wrote: > > Why is RLIMIT_NPROC apllied to root(uid 0) processes? It's not kernel j= > > ob to > > prevent admin from shooting him/her self in the foot. > > > > root should be able to do fork() regardless of any limits, > > and IMHO the following patch is the right thing. > > This patch is bogus. root can always raise their limit. But having root > tasks by default not take out the box is good OK, I just fix applications that assume root = no limits ;) Jan -- Jan R?korajski | ALL SUSPECTS ARE GUILTY. PERIOD! bagginsmimuw.edu.pl | OTHERWISE THEY WOULDN'T BE SUSPECTS, WOULD THEY? BOFH, type MANIAC | -- TROOPS by Kevin Rubio - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/