Re: little cp diff

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Claudio Jeker
Date: Saturday, February 6, 2010 - 11:42 am

On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 12:58:21PM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:

...


You should at least check against the rlimit of the process. It would suck
if something as simple as cp would suddenly start to fail in strange
cases. I wonder if the difference is noticeable or not.

-- 
:wq Claudio
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
little cp diff, Ted Unangst, (Fri Feb 5, 7:24 pm)
Re: little cp diff, Otto Moerbeek, (Sat Feb 6, 5:32 am)
Re: little cp diff, Mark Kettenis, (Sat Feb 6, 6:44 am)
Re: little cp diff, Ted Unangst, (Sat Feb 6, 7:14 am)
Re: little cp diff, Otto Moerbeek, (Sat Feb 6, 7:53 am)
Re: little cp diff, Vadim Zhukov, (Sat Feb 6, 8:27 am)
Re: little cp diff, Bob Beck, (Sat Feb 6, 9:45 am)
Re: little cp diff, Ted Unangst, (Sat Feb 6, 10:58 am)
Re: little cp diff, Bob Beck, (Sat Feb 6, 11:32 am)
Re: little cp diff, Otto Moerbeek, (Sat Feb 6, 11:35 am)
Re: little cp diff, Claus Assmann, (Sat Feb 6, 11:37 am)
Re: little cp diff, Claudio Jeker, (Sat Feb 6, 11:42 am)
Re: little cp diff, Bob Beck, (Sat Feb 6, 11:45 am)
Re: little cp diff, Bob Beck, (Sat Feb 6, 11:49 am)
Re: little cp diff, Ted Unangst, (Sat Feb 6, 8:42 pm)