Re: bin/57253: xargs wraps lines after ~4k characters

[Marc Daniel Fege <marc%fege.net@localhost>]

>  Out of curiosity: what value of ARG_MAX would make you happy? :)

Around 10M in one line would be sufficient for me. :-)

Marc.

Am Donnerstag, 2. März 2023, 13:35:01 CET schrieb RVP:
> The following reply was made to PR bin/57253; it has been noted by GNATS.
> 
> From: RVP <rvp%SDF.ORG@localhost>
> To: gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: bin/57253: xargs wraps lines after ~4k characters
> Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2023 12:31:38 +0000 (UTC)
> 
>  On Thu, 2 Mar 2023, Marc Daniel Fege wrote:
>  > Indeed, some limit will be there anyway. But do those limits need to be
>  > (artificially) defined in the userland programs themselves to handle an
>  > otherwise comming up exception of the programming language or library?
> 
>  You have to remember that the args. you're passing to the program
>  is on the stack, and while I can see the kernel folks being OK with
>  a 10MB stack on 64bit archs., I don't think they'll ever go for a
>  1GB stack just to carry program arguments. There are other methods
>  to do that. Like the `-f file' option in grep where you can supply
>  an arbitrary amount of pattern data.
> 
>  > I mean, the boundries between shells and tools have been pushed
>  > multiple times which I clearly see in the last 20+ years. So why
>  > not again at least push those limits to the technical/architecture
>  > maximum and equalize them out?
> 
>  Out of curiosity: what value of ARG_MAX would make you happy? :)
> 
>  -RVP