Re: RLIMIT_NOFILE fallback

[Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1014 bytes --]

Jeff King wrote:
> I wish we understood why getrlimit was failing. Returning EFAULT seems
> like an odd choice if it is not implemented for the system. On such a
> system, do the other fallbacks actually work? Would it work to do:
> 
> That is, does sysconf actually work on such a system (or does it need a
> similar run-time fallback)? And either way, we should try falling back
> to OPEN_MAX rather than 1 if we have it.

For what it's worth, the system this happened on was a QNAP TS-219PII
Linux willow 2.6.33.2 #1 Fri Mar 1 04:41:48 CST 2013 armv5tel unknown

I don't have access to it to run tests of sysconf. (I already suggested its
owner upgrade its firmware.)

> As far as the warning, I am not sure I see a point. The user does not
> have any useful recourse, and git should continue to operate as normal.
> Having every single git invocation print "by the way, RLIMIT_NOFILE does
> not work on your system" seems like it would get annoying.

I agree with that.

-- 
see shy jo

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]