Jeff King wrote: > I wish we understood why getrlimit was failing. Returning EFAULT seems > like an odd choice if it is not implemented for the system. On such a > system, do the other fallbacks actually work? Would it work to do: > > That is, does sysconf actually work on such a system (or does it need a > similar run-time fallback)? And either way, we should try falling back > to OPEN_MAX rather than 1 if we have it. For what it's worth, the system this happened on was a QNAP TS-219PII Linux willow 2.6.33.2 #1 Fri Mar 1 04:41:48 CST 2013 armv5tel unknown I don't have access to it to run tests of sysconf. (I already suggested its owner upgrade its firmware.) > As far as the warning, I am not sure I see a point. The user does not > have any useful recourse, and git should continue to operate as normal. > Having every single git invocation print "by the way, RLIMIT_NOFILE does > not work on your system" seems like it would get annoying. I agree with that. -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature