Cornelis de Gier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Cornelis de Gier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Would you please see if the following works on your system? >> The `$deep' should be `$tmp'. >> ( ulimit -s 50; du -s $tmp > /dev/null ) || fail=1 > >> If my system can do it with 8KB of stack, yours should be >> able to do it in no more than 50KB. >> If not, please try to find the smallest value larger than 50 >> that works for you. > > Lower values up to 800 cause du to segfault 9 in 10 cases, around 1500 > du segfaults about 1 in 10 cases. From 2000 du doesn't seem to > segfault.
Thanks for the info. Sounds like something strange is going on. Is ulimit the bash built-in for you? Run `type ulimit'. Can you reproduce this on the bash command line? I find it hard to believe that you need 1.5MB of stack to run du like that, so maybe something in libc or your kernel has changed how `ulimit -s' works? bash's `help ulimit' command says its argument specifies units of 1024 bytes. FYI, this works for me ( ulimit -s 8; du -s $tmp ) || echo fail with the same version of bash, and with (either Debian unstable's linux-2.4.24 or stock linux-2.6.2) and libc6-2.3.2.ds1-11. In any case, to avoid hassles with this test, I've temporarily disabled the part that tests du in that file. >>>Fedora Core 1 on Pentium 4 >>>Linux 2.4.22-1.2149.nptl >>>bash, version 2.05b.0(1)-release >>>gcc (GCC) 3.3.2 20031022 (Red Hat Linux 3.3.2-1) >>>CFLAGS=-O2 -march=pentium4 _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
