Re: Is amd64 ready for the desktop?

["Perry E. Metzger" <perry%piermont.com@localhost>]

Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost> writes:
> On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 09:33:18PM +0300, Aleksey Cheusov wrote:
>> P.S.
>> Is there any reason to have such a small stack by default?  IMHO
>> NetBSD Guide should describe how to increase it.  Segfaulting mplayer
>> is really annoying and it is not trivial to understand why it does
>> so. I guess some other "modern" application widely used on desktops
>> last years may require more than 2Mb of stack.
>
> I would not call 2MB a small stack. For threaded applications it is even
> smaller. Stupid programmers just want to recurse too much or drop heavy
> amounts of memory on the stack.

Perhaps, but regardless, the default ulimits should probably be based
on what is needed to actually protect the machine against rogue
processes rather than on numbers that were arbitrarily picked long
ago.

I think it would be best if ulimits were set at boot time based on
system resource sizes, and that way no one will have to ever think
about the problem again.

Perry