Draft ambiguity

[Moderator, John Quarterman]

Date: Fri, 22 Nov 85 09:34:32 cst
From: ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece at SEISMO.CSS.GOV (Scott Preece)

> From: athena!steved%tektronix.csnet at CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
> The limits file is not intended to represent necessarily the current
> limit.  For example, PROC_MAX tells an application programmer that he
> knows that there can be n processes existing simultaneously.  However,
> the o.s. implementer may have some dynamic allocation scheme where the
> actual limit varies with say system load.  The goal of the standard is
> to allow that kind of implementation.
----------
There are a lot of error definitions in the draft that specifically
say that specific, named system limits have been exceeded.  For
instance, the fork error code mention PROC_MAX and CHILD_MAX.
If the limit is, in fact, dynamic or otherwise differs from the
named constant, you are causing confusion...

[ Yes, it's hard to find non-confusing language to describe this.  -mod ]

-- 
scott preece
gould/csd - urbana
ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece

Volume-Number: Volume 3, Number 39