notfound 122400 0.79-4 thanks On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 08:31:59AM +0200, Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 06:33:20AM -0700, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > > #122400: pam_limits: support for 'unlimited' value would be nice, > > which was filed against the libpam-modules package. > > It has been closed by Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > > Source: pam > > Source-Version: 0.79-4 > > * Patch 005: sync pam_limits with upstream: > > - support "-" (unlimited) for all limit types except process priority. > > - support the additional aliases "-1", "unlimited", and "infinity" for > > clearing the limits; closes: #122400, #149027. > Hmmm, I cannot confirm that working. My (initial) > /etc/security/limits.conf setup is as follows: > * hard nofile 1024 > * soft nofile 1024 > holbe hard nofile 8000 > holbe soft nofile 8000 > When I log in as holbe, `ulimit -a' shows as expected: > -n: file descriptors 8000 > Once I've upgraded to libpam-modules 0.79-4 I tried to exchange both > `8000' with `unlimited'. A subsequent login as holbe and `ulimit -a' > shows: > -n: file descriptors 1024 > Even a subsequent `ulimit -n 2000' fails with: > ulimit: value exceeds hard limit > I subsequently tried all - the `-', `-1' and `infinity' keywords, same > result for all of them. > The keywords seem to be recognized, however, since pam_limits does not > syslog() any `wrong limit value' messages for them (as it does for > unrecognized keywords). This is not a limitation of pam_limits but a restriction of the Linux kernel, which doesn't allow you to set RLIMIT_NOFILE to RLIM_INFINITY. See bug #180310. The 'unlimited' keyword is allowed for other limits where this is permitted, so as far as I'm aware, this bug is indeed resolved in 0.79-4. Thanks, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
