bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) (04/28/91)
In article <dcm.672428949@baldur> dcm@baldur.dell.com (Dave McCracken) writes: |scotte@applix.com (Scott Evernden) writes: | |>In article <1991Apr21.140740.6766@gold.sub.org> root@gold.sub.org (Christian Seyb) writes: |>>Hello, |>> |>>I am using Unix 5.4 (4.0.2) and have a problem with ulimit. | |>Upping your ulimit is described in the FAQ for this group. I quote: " |> 1. If your desired limit is > 12288(6MB): |> Edit /etc/conf/cf.d/mtune to change the following line: |> ULIMIT 3072 2048 12288 |> to: |> ULIMIT 3072 2048 xxxxx |> etc. | |Unfortunately, this is no longer accurate for Unix 5.4 (SVR4). |The files that need to be changed are still valid |(/etc/conf/cf.d/?(mtune|stune)), but the value that controls Where will one find these files in the System V release 4 version for the Amiga? |file size limit (nee ULIMIT) has changed. As of SVR4, the complete |BSD-style resource limit capability has been implemented. To |change what is commonly considered ULIMIT, you need to change |the entries SFSZLIM (for soft limit) and HFSZLIM (for hard limit). |They are close to the bottom of the mtune file, along with some |comments (!!) that describe what they are. These limits are in |bytes, rather than blocks, and a value of 0 is no longer used |to mean unlimited. Unlimited is now MAXINT. | |Note that the ULIMIT entry in /etc/default login should still |work, and the shells still understand the ulimit command. For |a quick peek at the new features, to a "ulimit -A" to ksh. |Unfortunately, the values are printed in blocks for compatibility, |so be prepared for some confusion. That seems to be "ulimit -a" here... -- ,u, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ontario a /i/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu `\o\-e UUCP: ...!utai!mnetor!becker!bdb _< /_ "The really important problems require greater earnestness" - J. Cage
bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) (05/10/91)
In article <1991May8.183914.3059@eci386.uucp> woods@eci386.UUCP (Greg A. Woods) writes: |In article <2550@urbana.mcd.mot.com> dfields@urbana.mcd.mot.com writes: |> The reference m88k and m68k configuration is very similar to the reference |> 3b2. | |Good. I would hope so! Certainly drivers are going to be different, |but it's the same O/S, with the same tunable parameters (outside any |required by specific drivers). | |> The 3b2 reference port may have been first but all that means is that |> there were more bugs. The i386 port is the only one I'd base a |> product on. | |Scary that you should say that. Actually I've heard the 3b2 port runs |quite well. I'd run it on my 3b2 if I could get it for < $7,000(US)! Apparently the m68k port to the Commodore Amiga is in good shape - it certainly doesn't cost > $7000(US), even if you include all the hardware... -- ,u, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ontario a /i/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu `\o\-e UUCP: ...!utai!mnetor!becker!bdb _< /_ "It's the death of the net as we know it (and I feel fine)" - R.A.M.
wes@harem.clydeunix.com (Barnacle Wes) (05/18/91)
In article <1991May8.183914.3059@eci386.uucp> woods@eci386.UUCP (Greg A. Woods) writes: > Scary that you should say that. Actually I've heard the 3b2 port runs > quite well. I'd run it on my 3b2 if I could get it for < $7,000(US)! In article <99416@becker.UUCP>, bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) writes: % Apparently the m68k port to the Commodore % Amiga is in good shape - it certainly doesn't % cost > $7000(US), even if you include all % the hardware... That depends on your definition of "Good Shape." I played with an Amiga 3000/UX at the local dealer a month ago, and I found it to be excruciatingly slow, compared to myth, my brother's Step 386/20 with ISC Unix. The speed was comparable to obie, my Sperry PC/IT 7.16 Mhz 286 with Microport V/AT. This is a giant step backwards, I think. I guess Commodore should've waited for the 4000/UX ('040 machine). Wes Peters -- #include <std/disclaimer.h> The worst day sailing My opinions, your screen. is much better than Raxco had nothing to do with this! the best day at work. Wes Peters: wes@harem.clydeunix.com ...!sun!unislc!harem!wes
bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) (05/21/91)
In article <289@harem.clydeunix.com> wes@harem.clydeunix.com (Barnacle Wes) writes: | |In article <99416@becker.UUCP>, bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) writes: |% Apparently the m68k port to the Commodore |% Amiga is in good shape - it certainly doesn't |% cost > $7000(US), even if you include all |% the hardware... | |That depends on your definition of "Good Shape." I played with an |Amiga 3000/UX at the local dealer a month ago, and I found it to be |excruciatingly slow, compared to myth, my brother's Step 386/20 with |ISC Unix. The speed was comparable to obie, my Sperry PC/IT 7.16 Mhz |286 with Microport V/AT. This is a giant step backwards, I think. I |guess Commodore should've waited for the 4000/UX ('040 machine). Hmmm, you must have been playing with the X/Openlook stuff, which isn't currently in Good Shape due to being a too-vanilla port of X11R3, sigh. Fixed in Amiga Unix 2.0, or so I hear. Other than that, unless your dealer was showing some older demo version, I'd be surprised if any 386 system could come near the performance of the A3000 system (no need for the 68040 add-in card to do it either 8^). -- ,u, Bruce Becker Toronto, Ontario a /i/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu `\o\-e UUCP: ...!utai!mnetor!becker!bdb _< /_ "It's the death of the net as we know it (and I feel fine)" - R.A.M.
ford@amix.commodore.com (Mike "Ford" Ditto) (06/05/91)
In article <96037@becker.UUCP> bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce D. Becker) writes: >|> 1. If your desired limit is > 12288(6MB): >|> Edit /etc/conf/cf.d/mtune to change the following line: >|> ULIMIT 3072 2048 12288 >|> to: >|> ULIMIT 3072 2048 xxxxx > Where will one find these files in the > System V release 4 version for the Amiga? They are not needed. SVR4 has "hard" and "soft" limits like BSD. The soft limits are the ones used for enforcement of the resources. The hard limits determine how big an ordinary user can set his soft limits. Amiga Unix sets the soft limits to fairly large numbers (16 MB for the various memory limits) and the hard limits to "unlimited". So no kernel configuration is necessary to set these limits to whatever you want. -=] Ford [=- "The term most often used in this (In Real Life: Mike Ditto) manual is `implementation-defined'." ford@amix.commodore.com - SVR4 Programmer's Guide: POSIX uunet!cbmvax!ditto ford@kenobi.commodore.com