Re: Stack overflows (was: Re: Future of Debian uncertain?)
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 07:48:57PM +0100, Falk Hueffner wrote:
> "Keith G. Murphy" <keithmur@mindspring.com> writes:
>
> > # ulimit -a
> > core file size (blocks, -c) 0
> > data seg size (kbytes, -d) unlimited
> > file size (blocks, -f) unlimited
> > max locked memory (kbytes, -l) unlimited
> > max memory size (kbytes, -m) unlimited
> > open files (-n) 1024
> > pipe size (512 bytes, -p) 8
> > stack size (kbytes, -s) 8192
> > cpu time (seconds, -t) unlimited
> > max user processes (-u) 1024
> > virtual memory (kbytes, -v) unlimited
> >
> > on two different 3.0 systems of mine. Not that it's ever bitten me,
> > far as I know.
>
> It's not that difficult to hit when you do functional style
> programming, e. g. It would already be quite helpful IMHO if one
> didn't just get a SEGV, since that usually indicates a program error.
> I don't think there are any free signal numbers, though. Maybe one
> should send SIGBUS or something?
[snip]
SIGSTKFLT sounds like a good candidate.
But in terms of implementation, I'm not sure how easily distinguishible it
is from a SEGV; both are trying to access memory outside the allocated
range.
T
--
Gone Chopin. Bach in a minuet.
Reply to: