Return to BSD News archive
#! rnews 1432 sserve.cc.adfa.oz.au
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!agis!gatech!sdd.hp.com!svc.portal.com!news1.best.com!shell1.best.com!not-for-mail
From: dillon@best.com (Matt Dillon)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Zombie processes eating up CPU time (was Re: Internet Service Provider)
Date: 25 May 1995 16:31:07 -0700
Organization: Best Internet Communications, Inc. (info@best.com)
Lines: 19
Distribution: best
Message-ID: <3q340c$kqc@shell1.best.com>
References: <3pqb92$lq2@pt9201.ped.pto.ford.com> <3pub0e$ppd@gate.sinica.edu.tw> <D941A5.659@twwells.com> <3q2k6c$lvn@NNTP.MsState.Edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell1.best.com
Well, I would say that setting a general CPU limit is not really a good
solution... it will break valid programs worse then it will fix broken
ones.
The only time I ever set a cpu limit was in a hack to identd on BSDI
systems (which tends to get into infinite loops) after giving up trying
to fix the convoluted source code.
The problem is most definitely with the client applications (pine, tin,
etc...) not recognizing the EOF condition on the pty. The proper
solution is to fix the client applications, the OS is not broken.
-Matt
--
Matthew Dillon VP Engineering, BEST Internet Communications, Inc.
<dillon@best.com>, <dillon@apollo.west.oic.com>
[always include a portion of the original email in any response!]