Re: ssh as user: setrlimit failed

[James Morrison]

--- Roland McGrath <roland@gnu.org> wrote:
> > For now at least for RLIMIT_CORE I think we should just accept
> any hard
> > maximum.  However, to implement core dumps would that be a core
> server
> > that actually implemented limits on core sizes and such?
>
> Yes.  If the limit is zero, then you don't call the crash server at
> all (we
> don't call it the "core server" because then we'd want to use names
> like
> /servers/core and /hurd/core, and we're afraid of well-meaning cron
> jobs).
> For a limit of another finite size, it's just like the RLIMIT_FSIZE
> limits
> that we also don't implement--it would be arranged somehow with the
> filesystem server.
>
Well, now I know something else the crash server does ;)

Ok, but what you said, it seems you have to tell the crash server it
should
allow core dumps as opposed to a core dump, which is not implemented,
being
the normal case.

 It would be nice for this to be implemented but I know I'm no where
near
touching the crash server yet.

 Off the current topic I've been looking at the symlink server
recently
and there are two mach_port_t 's that I noticed.  One is realnode and
the
other is realnodenoauth.  What is the difference between these port_t's.

=====
James Morrison
   University of Waterloo
   Computer Science - Digital Hardware
   2A co-op
http://hurd.dyndns.org

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
NEW from Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1