Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 20:22:08 +1100 From: Tim Robbins <tjr@freebsd.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: FreeBSD current users <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD 1.1 under -current :-) Message-ID: <20040206092208.GA52274@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0402060026550.24232-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0402060026550.24232-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Feb 06, 2004 at 12:37:30AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: [...] > apparrently programs in 1.1 can not handle that the PID can go past > 32767 now.. 'wait()' for example fails.. > > ok , so recompile my kenrel with PID_MAX set to 30000 > and try again.. > all works fine.. > > I'm tempted to make PID_MAX a tunable or a sysctl.. I think FreeBSD 1.1 compatibility is obscure enough that there's no need for it to work in out of the box (i.e. GENERIC) at the cost of increased complexity in non-obscure configurations. Ideally, COMPAT_43 would be broken up into COMPAT_43, COMPAT_FREEBSD[123], etc., removed from GENERIC and perhaps then we could define PID_MAX conditionally on these options or at least #error out. > I think that some compatibility modes may have teh same problems > (though I doubt that many people use anything other than Linux > compatibility) As far as I know, only iBCS2 needs 16-bit bits. iBCS2 support would be more productive dead, as would our obviously unused and untested SVR4 support. Tim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040206092208.GA52274>