From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Jul 10 3:55:35 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mail2.netcologne.de (mail2.netcologne.de [194.8.194.103]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31A4537B62B; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 03:55:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pherman@frenchfries.net) Received: from bagabeedaboo.security.at12.de (dial-195-14-250-170.netcologne.de [195.14.250.170]) by mail2.netcologne.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA14916; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 12:55:29 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from localhost (localhost.security.at12.de [127.0.0.1]) by bagabeedaboo.security.at12.de (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id e6AAt8855290; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 12:55:08 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 12:55:07 +0200 (CEST) From: Paul Herman To: Adrian Chadd Cc: core-ix@hushmail.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: fork throttling (was Re: Some proposals to FreeBSD kernel) In-Reply-To: <20000710124355.D837@ywing.creative.net.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Adrian Chadd wrote: > Well, IMHO I think something like this implemented in the kernel for > the reasons given above would let people write bad code. Yup, that clinches it for me. You're right. This would have fallen more into the catagory of "bad program design fix" rather than general administrative limits, in the case of /etc/login.conf. Consider this thread dead. (sorry "core-ix@hushmail.com", I tried. :) -Paul. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message