Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote:
Hey there,
I've seen the changes you made in commit b6a2fea39318 and I guess they
might be responsible for my xargs breakage...
In the kernel source tree, if I run a stupid find | xargs ls, I now get
this:
xargs: ls: Argument list too long
Which is
Am Samstag, 6. Oktober 2007 10:29 schrieb Hans-Peter Jansen:
> Am Donnerstag, 4. Oktober 2007 19:05 schrieb Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer:
> > Hey there,
> >
> > I've seen the changes you made in commit b6a2fea39318 and I guess they
> > might be responsible for my xargs breakage...
> >
> > In
Am Donnerstag, 4. Oktober 2007 19:05 schrieb Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer:
> Hey there,
>
> I've seen the changes you made in commit b6a2fea39318 and I guess they
> might be responsible for my xargs breakage...
>
> In the kernel source tree, if I run a stupid find | xargs ls, I now get
>
Am Donnerstag, 4. Oktober 2007 19:05 schrieb Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer:
Hey there,
I've seen the changes you made in commit b6a2fea39318 and I guess they
might be responsible for my xargs breakage...
In the kernel source tree, if I run a stupid find | xargs ls, I now get
this:
Am Samstag, 6. Oktober 2007 10:29 schrieb Hans-Peter Jansen:
Am Donnerstag, 4. Oktober 2007 19:05 schrieb Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer:
Hey there,
I've seen the changes you made in commit b6a2fea39318 and I guess they
might be responsible for my xargs breakage...
In the kernel
Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote:
Hey there,
I've seen the changes you made in commit b6a2fea39318 and I guess they
might be responsible for my xargs breakage...
In the kernel source tree, if I run a stupid find | xargs ls, I now get
this:
xargs: ls: Argument list too long
Which is
On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 05:22 +0200, Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 05:12:11PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > I also tested that "ulimit -s" seems to do the right thing for me.
> >
> > I'm also assuming Mathieu is running x86 (or x86-64): HP-PA has a stack
> > that
On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 05:22 +0200, Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote:
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 05:12:11PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
I also tested that ulimit -s seems to do the right thing for me.
I'm also assuming Mathieu is running x86 (or x86-64): HP-PA has a stack
that grows
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 05:12:11PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I also tested that "ulimit -s" seems to do the right thing for me.
>
> I'm also assuming Mathieu is running x86 (or x86-64): HP-PA has a stack
> that grows upwards, and that has traditionally been exciting.
Correct, x86 it is but
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Linus Torvalds writes:
> >
> > Well, since others definitely don't see this, including me, and I can do
> > things like 62MB exec arrays:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] linux]$ echo $(find /home/torvalds/) | wc
> > 1 883304 63000962
>
>
Linus Torvalds writes:
> Well, since others definitely don't see this, including me, and I can do
> things like 62MB exec arrays:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] linux]$ echo $(find /home/torvalds/) | wc
> 1 883304 63000962
That wouldn't actually do an exec, assuming you're using
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 07:17:50PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> what happens if you up the stack limit to say 128M ?
>
> Also, do you happen to have execve syscall audit stuff enabled?
Actually, you were right, not only it's enabled but it's also the
culprit. If I stop it, all is well...
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 05:50:00PM -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> On 10/04/2007 01:05 PM, Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote:
> > In the kernel source tree, if I run a stupid find | xargs ls, I now get
> > this:
> > xargs: ls: Argument list too long
> >
>
> Can you strace it to see what syscall is
On 10/04/2007 01:05 PM, Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote:
> In the kernel source tree, if I run a stupid find | xargs ls, I now get
> this:
> xargs: ls: Argument list too long
>
Can you strace it to see what syscall is failing?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 07:17:50PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> /me tries
>
> yep works like a charm, and that is a tree with a full git repo and
> several build dirs in it.
Well, what can I say? ;-)
> what happens if you up the stack limit to say 128M ?
It's unlimited.
> Also, do you
Thank you for getting back to me.
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 10:27:52AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> What does your "ulimit -s" say?
That's actually the first thing I checked.
mchouque - /usr/src/kernel/linux %ulimit -s
unlimited
And for the record, ulimit -a yields:
-t: cpu time (seconds)
On Thu, 4 Oct 2007, Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote:
>
> Anything else you'd like me to try?
Well, since others definitely don't see this, including me, and I can do
things like 62MB exec arrays:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] linux]$ echo $(find /home/torvalds/) | wc
1 883304
Hey there,
I've seen the changes you made in commit b6a2fea39318 and I guess they
might be responsible for my xargs breakage...
In the kernel source tree, if I run a stupid find | xargs ls, I now get
this:
xargs: ls: Argument list too long
Which is kind of annoying but I can work
On Thu, 4 Oct 2007, Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote:
>
> I've seen the changes you made in commit b6a2fea39318 and I guess they
> might be responsible for my xargs breakage...
>
> In the kernel source tree, if I run a stupid find | xargs ls, I now get
> this:
> xargs: ls: Argument list too
On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 19:05 +0200, Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote:
> Hey there,
>
> I've seen the changes you made in commit b6a2fea39318 and I guess they
> might be responsible for my xargs breakage...
>
> In the kernel source tree, if I run a stupid find | xargs ls, I now get
> this:
>
On Thu, 4 Oct 2007, Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote:
I've seen the changes you made in commit b6a2fea39318 and I guess they
might be responsible for my xargs breakage...
In the kernel source tree, if I run a stupid find | xargs ls, I now get
this:
xargs: ls: Argument list too long
What
On Thu, 2007-10-04 at 19:05 +0200, Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote:
Hey there,
I've seen the changes you made in commit b6a2fea39318 and I guess they
might be responsible for my xargs breakage...
In the kernel source tree, if I run a stupid find | xargs ls, I now get
this:
xargs: ls:
Hey there,
I've seen the changes you made in commit b6a2fea39318 and I guess they
might be responsible for my xargs breakage...
In the kernel source tree, if I run a stupid find | xargs ls, I now get
this:
xargs: ls: Argument list too long
Which is kind of annoying but I can work
On Thu, 4 Oct 2007, Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote:
Anything else you'd like me to try?
Well, since others definitely don't see this, including me, and I can do
things like 62MB exec arrays:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] linux]$ echo $(find /home/torvalds/) | wc
1 883304
Thank you for getting back to me.
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 10:27:52AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
What does your ulimit -s say?
That's actually the first thing I checked.
mchouque - /usr/src/kernel/linux %ulimit -s
unlimited
And for the record, ulimit -a yields:
-t: cpu time (seconds)
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 07:17:50PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
/me tries
yep works like a charm, and that is a tree with a full git repo and
several build dirs in it.
Well, what can I say? ;-)
what happens if you up the stack limit to say 128M ?
It's unlimited.
Also, do you happen to
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 05:50:00PM -0400, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
On 10/04/2007 01:05 PM, Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote:
In the kernel source tree, if I run a stupid find | xargs ls, I now get
this:
xargs: ls: Argument list too long
Can you strace it to see what syscall is failing?
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 07:17:50PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
what happens if you up the stack limit to say 128M ?
Also, do you happen to have execve syscall audit stuff enabled?
Actually, you were right, not only it's enabled but it's also the
culprit. If I stop it, all is well...
Sorry
On 10/04/2007 01:05 PM, Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote:
In the kernel source tree, if I run a stupid find | xargs ls, I now get
this:
xargs: ls: Argument list too long
Can you strace it to see what syscall is failing?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel
Linus Torvalds writes:
Well, since others definitely don't see this, including me, and I can do
things like 62MB exec arrays:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] linux]$ echo $(find /home/torvalds/) | wc
1 883304 63000962
That wouldn't actually do an exec, assuming you're using bash,
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Paul Mackerras wrote:
Linus Torvalds writes:
Well, since others definitely don't see this, including me, and I can do
things like 62MB exec arrays:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] linux]$ echo $(find /home/torvalds/) | wc
1 883304 63000962
That wouldn't
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 05:12:11PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
I also tested that ulimit -s seems to do the right thing for me.
I'm also assuming Mathieu is running x86 (or x86-64): HP-PA has a stack
that grows upwards, and that has traditionally been exciting.
Correct, x86 it is but as I
32 matches
Mail list logo
