Draft ambiguity
Moderator, John Quarterman
std-unix at ut-sally.UUCP
Sat Nov 23 12:16:55 AEST 1985
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 85 09:34:32 cst
From: ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece at SEISMO.CSS.GOV (Scott Preece)
> From: athena!steved%tektronix.csnet at 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
More information about the Mod.std.unix
mailing list