fredagen den 28 februari 2003 kl 07.42 skrev Justin Walker: On Thursday, Feb 27, 2003, at 20:19 US/Pacific, Douglas Stetner wrote: So is there an apple bug report open on this? I don't believe there is, but regardless, I don't think that there's a bug to report. It's been discussed here, as I recall, and the mechanism described. I am currently running at about 93 processes and do not look forward to having to build a new kernel to keep myself going. If you had to, that would be a bug, but your shell gives you the means to change this (at least for most available shells). Check your shell's man page for 'ulimit' (or 'limit'). Actually, there does seem to be a bug. limit -h reports maxproc as unlimited, but as soon I try to set the soft limit, the hard limit is set to 100. If I su to root, I can set the hard limit as high as 532. When I then su back to the user, limit -h reports 532, but when I try to set the soft limit, the hard limit is again lowered to 100. It seems that as soon as a normal user calls setrlimit, the hard limit is lowered to 100. Shouldn't I be able to set the hard limit as long as it is lower than the current one, regardless of the default? At least that's what setrlimit(2) seems to say. I tried it with both bash and tcsh, so it doesn't seem to be a shell bug. _______________________________________________ darwin-kernel mailing list | darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/darwin-kernel Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.