On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, Jeff Jirsa wrote:
I've noticed that currently, violations of securelevel are aborted, but not
typically logged. It seems like in addition to aborting whichever calls are
in progress, logging an error might be beneficial. I recognize that this
goes along the same lines
Heh. I had something a little like that at one point -- it just acted as a
pass-through, but also logged in the pcap format. I thought someone had
done modifications to tcpdump to allow it to speak to divert sockets,
don't know that it was ever actually committed. Might be in the PR's
still.
I wrote a small program as follows
int i = 32;
int
main(){ while (1) malloc(i); }
As long as i is in between 1 and 32, all memory is used up and all swap is used up,
and then the process is killed.
Again, when i 32, all seems well.
What could be the problem?
-Ram
To Unsubscribe: send
int i = 32;
int
main(){ while (1) malloc(i); }
As long as i is in between 1 and 32, all memory is used up and all swap is used up,
and then the process is killed.
Again, when i 32, all seems well.
dirty at least a byte of the data:
main(){ while (1) { char *p (char *) malloc(i);
But why does this not happen after i = 32 ? I hardly see any increase in
memory usage after that.
-Ram
== mark tinguely [EMAIL PROTECTED]/11:30am/Mar 16, 2002 ==
[ int i = 32;
[
[ int
[ main(){ while (1) malloc(i); }
[
[
[ As long as i is in between 1 and 32, all memory is used up and all
But why does this not happen after i = 32 ? I hardly see any increase in
memory usage after that.
I think you are backstoring pages that hold the allocated memory bucket
pointers, not the data itself. in the i 32 you run out of these pages
of pointers to buckets before you hit your data
okay... seems we are now out of topic... some arguments for a change some to
retain the old custom (and in my opinion bootless stuff). I think later
we'll need a survey for this and volunteers to do the work (if we want to do
the change)...
Alex are you still workin' for a patch?
Jan
At 09:23 16-3-2002 -0500, Robert Watson wrote:
Second, these
warnings would be generated during normal operations, as a number of
applications attempt to load kernel modules when they need them, including
ppp. Generating spurious warnings as part of normal system activity isn't
necessarily a
On Sat, Mar 16, 2002 at 09:57:46AM -0500, Robert Watson wrote:
Heh. I had something a little like that at one point -- it just acted as a
pass-through, but also logged in the pcap format. I thought someone had
done modifications to tcpdump to allow it to speak to divert sockets,
don't know
On Sat, 16 Mar 2002, Rogier R. Mulhuijzen wrote:
At 09:23 16-3-2002 -0500, Robert Watson wrote:
Second, these
warnings would be generated during normal operations, as a number of
applications attempt to load kernel modules when they need them, including
ppp. Generating spurious warnings
Terry Lambert wrote:
It got really bogged down when someone pointed out that
they were running CPUs with different clock rates in their
SMP box, just to see what the net effect would be. THe
As far as I understand, you just physically can't do it:
the P-II CPU initialization depends on
Sergey Babkin wrote:
Terry Lambert wrote:
It got really bogged down when someone pointed out that
they were running CPUs with different clock rates in their
SMP box, just to see what the net effect would be. THe
As far as I understand, you just physically can't do it:
the P-II CPU
I looked around for quite a while for a simple program
to do a binary patch on an iso cdrom image. I was hoping
that I could use bvi or similar binary editor, but it
wasn't clear how I could get them to do simple string
replacement. So, I wrote one and am putting it in the
public domain, I hope
* Clark C . Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] [020316 14:34] wrote:
I looked around for quite a while for a simple program
to do a binary patch on an iso cdrom image. I was hoping
that I could use bvi or similar binary editor, but it
wasn't clear how I could get them to do simple string
replacement.
So, whose palm do I grease to get some PR's taken care of? ;-)
- docs/31265 - Documentation (and adjustment) of cron allow/deny file
formats
Best (IMO, but then, I wrote it ;) patch at end of audit trail.
- docs/35436 - Webpage update; don't push PAO
Patch in PR
-
Hi Matthey,
This kind of messages belong in the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list. This list
has been opened by the bugmeister for sending PRs which need closing an
the jazz.. ;) It is called the BugBusting Project.
This list was previously [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please send all stocked close
requests to
On Sat, Mar 16, 2002 at 09:57:46AM -0500, Robert Watson wrote:
Heh. I had something a little like that at one point -- it just
acted as a pass-through, but also logged in the pcap format. I
thought someone had done modifications to tcpdump to allow it to
speak to divert sockets, don't know
17 matches
Mail list logo
