Article View: mod.std.unix
Article #47Re: Draft ambiguity
From: Moderator, John Quarterman
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 1985 02:16
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 1985 02:16
25 lines
1662 bytes
1662 bytes
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 85 09:34:32 cst From: ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece@SEISMO.CSS.GOV (Scott Preece) > From: athena!steved%tektronix.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA > The limits file is not intended to represent necessarily the current > limit. For example, PROC_MAX tells an application programmer that he > knows that there can be n processes existing simultaneously. However, > the o.s. implementer may have some dynamic allocation scheme where the > actual limit varies with say system load. The goal of the standard is > to allow that kind of implementation. ---------- There are a lot of error definitions in the draft that specifically say that specific, named system limits have been exceeded. For instance, the fork error code mention PROC_MAX and CHILD_MAX. If the limit is, in fact, dynamic or otherwise differs from the named constant, you are causing confusion... [ Yes, it's hard to find non-confusing language to describe this. -mod ] -- scott preece gould/csd - urbana ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece Volume-Number: Volume 3, Number 39
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<3636@ut-sally.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!gatech!seismo!ut-sally!std-unixShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ut-sally.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!gatech!seismo!ut-sally!std-unix From: std-unix@ut-sally.UUCP (Moderator, John Quarterman) Newsgroups: mod.std.unix Subject: Re: Draft ambiguity Message-ID: <3636@ut-sally.UUCP> Date: Fri, 22-Nov-85 21:16:55 EST Article-I.D.: ut-sally.3636 Posted: Fri Nov 22 21:16:55 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 24-Nov-85 05:33:22 EST Organization: IEEE/P1003 Portable Operating System Environment Committee Lines: 25 Approved: jsq@ut-sally.UUCP