From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sat May 31 18:01:53 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA26695
          for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 31 May 1997 18:01:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from andrsn.stanford.edu (root@andrsn.Stanford.EDU [36.33.0.163])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA26690
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sat, 31 May 1997 18:01:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (andrsn@localhost.Stanford.EDU [127.0.0.1]) by andrsn.stanford.edu (8.8.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA09097; Sat, 31 May 1997 18:01:46 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 18:01:46 -0700 (PDT)
From: Annelise Anderson <andrsn@andrsn.stanford.edu>
To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: LINT and GENERIC - between a rock and a generic place.
In-Reply-To: <9876.865110612@time.cdrom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.94.970531175510.9045A-100000@andrsn.stanford.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk



On Sat, 31 May 1997, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:

> More and more people are trying to use GENERIC as a template for their
> own kernels and they're losing, of course, because generic sets many
> limits (like max children or open files) too low.

So maybe the limits could be increased?  Or was it a trick question?

Annelise