Re: Stopping svscanned supervise processes on shutdown

[Paul Jarc]

Drew Raines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * MarkD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> I guess a command line overflow is possible, albeit unlikely.
> 
> I've never run into that.  Although I don't have but four or five
> supervise'd processes.  What's the limit?  Is it shell-imposed, or
> dependent on mem/swap?

It's a constant, determined by the kernel - you can pass only so much
information to execve().  The shell might also have its own
limitations.


paul