[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug #31424] _SC_ARG_MAX is unreliable on Interix
From: |
James Youngman |
Subject: |
[bug #31424] _SC_ARG_MAX is unreliable on Interix |
Date: |
Sat, 23 Oct 2010 11:37:41 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US) AppleWebKit/533.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/5.0.342.7 Safari/533.2 |
URL:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?31424>
Summary: _SC_ARG_MAX is unreliable on Interix
Project: findutils
Submitted by: jay
Submitted on: Sat Oct 23 11:37:40 2010
Category: xargs
Severity: 3 - Normal
Item Group: Wrong result
Status: None
Privacy: Public
Assigned to: jay
Originator Name: Markus Duft
Originator Email: address@hidden
Open/Closed: Open
Discussion Lock: Any
Release: None
Fixed Release: None
_______________________________________________________
Details:
I recently updated my findutils builds on interix (work without
any patches (except a gnulib patch i already submitted), thanks
for the great work ;) ), and stumbled across a small problem:
mduft xargs $ find /usr/ | ./xargs
./xargs: /bin/echo: Cannot allocate memory
mduft xargs $ ./xargs --show-limits
Your environment variables take up 3119 bytes
POSIX upper limit on argument length (this system): 1043409
POSIX smallest allowable upper limit on argument length (all systems): 4096
Maximum length of command we could actually use: 1040290
Size of command buffer we are actually using: 131072
It seems that max argument length is too high...
Now, i'm pretty aware that interix is doing _many_ things wrong, and
sysconf(_SC_ARG_MAX) may well return a much too high number, but to
consistently handle such cases, would it be wise to cap the max argument
length to a sane value in xargs?
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?31424>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.gnu.org/
- [bug #31424] _SC_ARG_MAX is unreliable on Interix,
James Youngman <=