Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 11:41:31 -0700 (MST) From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: =?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= <ache@nagual.pp.ru> Cc: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>, Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Inetd & login class bug (was Re: cvs commit: src/etc master.passwd) Message-ID: <199710271841.LAA01233@rocky.mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971027213056.1103A-100000@lsd.relcom.eu.net> References: <199710271827.UAA29423@greenpeace.grondar.za> <Pine.BSF.3.96.971027213056.1103A-100000@lsd.relcom.eu.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[ Moved to -current from cvs-committers ] " fingerd uses up all the resources that Apache needs " > It seems inetd must be fixed somehow to stop using nobody limits. Maybe, but I think you hit the nail on the head below. > I am not sure, how to fix inetd at this time, maybe we need to handle > nobody name specially (and use daemon limits in this case), or maybe > just use daemon limits for _all_ entries in inetd.conf... > Any ideas? I think that every new process spawned from inetd should have it's own 'private' nobody limits, and not 'share' a set of limits for every process spawned from inetd. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199710271841.LAA01233>