Yes, it should be PROC_TID_DELAY_ACCT. Looks like a cut-n-paste problem :) Will provide a patch.
chandra On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 23:58 -0700, Paul Menage wrote: > On 7/13/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > @@ -191,6 +198,9 @@ static struct pid_entry tid_base_stuff[] > > #ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY > > E(PROC_TID_ATTR, "attr", S_IFDIR|S_IRUGO|S_IXUGO), > > #endif > > +#ifdef CONFIG_DELAY_ACCT > > + E(PROC_TGID_DELAY_ACCT,"delay", S_IFREG|S_IRUGO), > > +#endif > > Shouldn't this be PROC_TID_DELAY_ACCT? > > Paul > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies > from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, > informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to > speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=click > _______________________________________________ > ckrm-tech mailing list > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Chandra Seetharaman | Be careful what you choose.... - [EMAIL PROTECTED] | .......you may get it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click _______________________________________________ ckrm-tech mailing list https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
