Subject: Re: fsck & ccd
To: Chris G. Demetriou <cgd@cs.cmu.edu>
From: Andrew Brown <codewarrior@daemon.org>
List: port-i386
Date: 02/27/1997 23:38:29
>> From: Chris G. Demetriou
>
>> On Thu, 27 Feb 1997 09:34:25 +0200 (EET)
>> Jukka Marin <jmarin@pyy.jmp.fi> wrote:
>>
>> > # fsck /dev/ccd0d
>> > ** /dev/rccd0d
>> > cannot alloc 7948802 bytes for lncntp
>> >
>> > (This is a nice 16 GB ccd disk... :-)
>>
>> Eek! Well, you're hitting the default rlimits. Try unlimiting the
>> data size ...
>
>This is the most convincing argument i've heard thus far for the fact
>that the i386 default limits are too low... If you can't even fsck a
>'reasonable size' disk/partition with the default limits, there's a
>problem.
why don't we just make fsck check and adjust these limits for itself?
can't we "assume" that it knows what it's doing? granted, perhaps
they are a little low for some things, but since anything can modify
them if need be, why are shells the only things that do (more or less)?
--
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
andrew@echonyc.com (TheMan) * "ah! i see you have the internet
codewarrior@daemon.org that goes *ping*!"
warfare@graffiti.com * "information is power -- share the wealth."