On Tue, 13 Jul 1999 14:31:38 -0700 (PDT) Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > :- I might be creating a very limited embedded system with just a few > : small processes that are all written to *handle* out of memory situations. > > Really? Then setting resource limits from within each program is not > a problem now is it? Then it will get a nice malloc failure instead > of getting killed by the kernel. See chris's point... Maybe you have one process that needs 10MB and a few others that need 300K - 1MB. Resource limits are not useful in this scenario. ...and, who said anything about using malloc()? :-) -- Jason R. Thorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Robert Elz
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Michael Richardson
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Matthew Dillon
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Neil A. Carson
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Matthew Dillon
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Jason Thorpe
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Jason Thorpe
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Matthew Dillon
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) David Brownlee
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Matthew Dillon
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Jason Thorpe
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Matthew Dillon
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Jason Thorpe
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Matthew Dillon
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Robert Elz
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Jason Thorpe
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Matthew Dillon
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Daniel C. Sobral
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Jason Thorpe
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Matthew Dillon
- Re: Replacement for grep(1) (part 2) Daniel C. Sobral