From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from primenet.com.au (ns1.primenet.com.au [203.24.36.2]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 6a860135 for ; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 16:43:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 6172 invoked by alias); 13 Jan 2020 16:43:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: X-Seq: 45297 Received: (qmail 17478 invoked by uid 1010); 13 Jan 2020 16:43:32 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com by f.primenet.com.au (envelope-from , uid 7791) with qmail-scanner-2.11 (clamdscan: 0.102.1/25691. spamassassin: 3.4.2. Clear:RC:0(66.111.4.25):SA:0(-2.6/5.0):. Processed in 1.508842 secs); 13 Jan 2020 16:43:32 -0000 X-Envelope-From: d.s@daniel.shahaf.name X-Qmail-Scanner-Mime-Attachments: | X-Qmail-Scanner-Zip-Files: | Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at daniel.shahaf.name does not designate permitted sender hosts) X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedrvdejtddgledtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtgfesth hqredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdffrghnihgvlhcuufhhrghhrghffdcuoegurdhssegu rghnihgvlhdrshhhrghhrghfrdhnrghmvgeqnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpe gurdhssegurghnihgvlhdrshhhrghhrghfrdhnrghmvgenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigv pedt X-ME-Proxy: X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-754-g09d1619-fmstable-20200113v1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <82F8CDE0-C95C-4D31-ABFC-EBB3C97799F3@kba.biglobe.ne.jp> <1B509B1C-A670-482F-9D88-2145E15D03A1@kba.biglobe.ne.jp> <20200109131553.hqetnd45sc43z6xb@tarpaulin.shahaf.local2> <087AE8B9-35B0-4258-9626-AACA85471A07@kba.biglobe.ne.jp> <20200111201549.GA1264@tarpaulin.shahaf.local2> Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 16:42:35 +0000 From: "Daniel Shahaf" To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] find RLIM_NLIMITS correctly on Cygwin Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Jun T wrote on Mon, 13 Jan 2020 11:00 +00:00: >=20 >=20 > > 2020/01/12 5:15, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > >=20 > > The part that's not clear to me is how we'd even know that =C2=AB8=C2= =BB is a valid value for > > the first actual argument to getrlimit(). Currently, the code assum= es that the > > values of RLIMIT_* macros are consecutive small integers, but that i= s not guaranteed > > by any standard, is it? >=20 > There is no guarantee, but current version of ulimit builtin accepts a= ny number > for -N (and output error). limit builtin accepts only the resource nam= e, > and maybe we accept "unknonw8" only for getrlimit() but not for setrli= mit()? Sorry, I don't follow. Why shouldn't we accept "unknown8" in the limit-= setting syntaxes?