On Friday 04 November 2011 08:50:02 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On 3 November 2011 09:31, Carmelo AMOROSO <carmelo.amor...@st.com> wrote:
> > On several architectures __NR_ulimit syscall number is currently
> > defined but it is remapped onto sys_ni_syscall, while on other
> > architectures they are not longer defined.
> > So use {get,set}rlimit only to implement ulimit interface.
> >
> > It fixes LTP ulimit01 test case.
>
> What about fixing the kernel instead to not define numbers for the
> unavailable stuff?yeah, that makes more sense to me. if your headers say you have the ulimit syscall, we shouldn't bother trying to emulate it in userspace. fix the kernel and be done. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list uClibc@uclibc.org http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
