On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 06:04:20PM +0200, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:
On Mon, Jun 20, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-06-20 at 17:27 +0200, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 15, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> > > > Ok, attached is a patch, where I fixed the syntax
errors and I
> > > > added an "init_all" option. Means by default no behavior
changes
> > > > against the current version. If admin specifies "init_all",
the missing
> > > > limits will be set from the one of process with PId 1.
> > > I'm just slightly opposed to the
'init_all' option name. Perhaps
> > > something like 'reset_all' or 'reset_from_init' would
better describe
> > > the functionality?
> > I'm confused, I thought I had answered already, but
cannot find my mail ...
> > I have no problem with renaming that option, but I
don't like "reset*",
> > because that sounds like there are modified default values. But in reality,
> > we use the values from the init process, which are not necessarly the
> > default system values.
> OK, then what about "set_from_init" or more simple
"set_all"?
"set_all" would be fine for me.
That sounds good to me as well. Thanks!
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer
http://www.debian.org/
slangasek(a)ubuntu.com vorlon(a)debian.org