Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:18:42 -0600 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> To: Tim Robbins <tjr@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD current users <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD 1.1 under -current :-) Message-ID: <20040206151842.GE76684@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <20040206092208.GA52274@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0402060026550.24232-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <20040206092208.GA52274@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Feb 06), Tim Robbins said: > 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. The 30000->99999 change went in on rev 1.62 of proc.h, between 3.0 and 3.1, so you would have seen the same problem booting 2.2.8. It's nice that we can still run a 1.1 userland, though :) -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040206151842.GE76684>