[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Alan Barrett <apb%cequrux.com@localhost> wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Sep 2011, Abhinav Upadhyay wrote:
> > Not only ls(1) but probably a number of other programs are not behaving
> > correclty under low file descriptor limit.
> > For example:
> > $ man ls
> > .: 4: Invalid argument
> I can't replicate that. I get the following results, with everything
> either working or giving a reasonable error:
I also see man(1) working properly if I use the above script. But I
did something like this:
$ ulimit -n 5
$ man ls
.: 4: Invalid argument
Fair enough. I didn't perform a thorough enough check like you did,
most probably my environment had to do something with the weird
results I got.
> > It was even more weird to see that ls(1) and man(1) exited with proper
> > error messages if I tried to do something like this:
> > $ . ls #supply name of any executable file
> > .: Cannot execute ELF binary /bin/ls
> > $ ls
> > ls: .: Too many open files
> Those error messages seem reasonable to me.
My point with the above example was that, if you have a low file
descriptor limit, then ls(1) lists all the sub-directories, but if you
execute the above set of commands sequentially, ls(1) does give a sane
message and exits. Probably man(1) is irrelevant here. I mixed it up.
Main Index |
Thread Index |