Re: [Re-asking] Group limitation of 32 in Sarge with kernel 2.6
From: Bob Proulx (bob_at_proulx.com)
Date: 06/28/05
- Previous message: Philip Ross: "Re: degraded array - former device is unavailable"
- In reply to: Pekka Laukkanen: "[Re-asking] Group limitation of 32 in Sarge with kernel 2.6"
- Next in thread: Joerg Rossdeutscher: "Re: [Re-asking] Group limitation of 32 in Sarge with kernel 2.6"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 09:16:59 -0600 To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Pekka Laukkanen wrote:
> Some time ago I asked about the limitation that one person (actually a
> process) can be member of only 32 groups. The problem was originally in
> the kernel but ought to be solved with the 2.6 release. The problem
> still exists in Debian Sarge with 2.6.8 kernel, though, as my original
> message (included below) shows. The problem seems to be rather hard
> since nobody replied. Just today we needed to do some extra work because
> of it and I decided to ask again.
I saw your original message and noted it here as a warning that I
might run into it in the future. It was useful to me just for that
purpose if for nothing else.
> This time I would also be happy if someone could point me to another
> mailing list (or other source) where to ask. Would it be appropriate to
> use for example debian-devel? As an extreme measure I would also be
> interested to hear about other distros that would not have this
> limitation anymore.
If you are motivated I would suggest getting the pristine kernel.org
linux-2.6 sources and compiling a stock kernel without the Debian
patches. Then see if the behavior persists. If it works then you
know it is something Debian has done with patches. If not then it is
an upstream problem regardless of the changelog entry that says it was
fixed. This exercise needs to be done to isolate where the issue
lies. At that time I would take the discussion to the linux kernel
mailing list and ask there. It might actually not be fixed or it
might need some additional special configuration that is not being
done.
One thing to be careful of is that utilities such as 'groups' may have
limitations in the code. I don't know. But it would certainly be
possible for a utility to have a smaller buffer or expect a different
behavior than the kernel. If you see something that looks like a
fixed buffer size in one of the coreutils please be sure to report
that to the the bug-coreutils mailing list because it is not
intentional.
Bob
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
- application/pgp-signature attachment: Digital signature
- Previous message: Philip Ross: "Re: degraded array - former device is unavailable"
- In reply to: Pekka Laukkanen: "[Re-asking] Group limitation of 32 in Sarge with kernel 2.6"
- Next in thread: Joerg Rossdeutscher: "Re: [Re-asking] Group limitation of 32 in Sarge with kernel 2.6"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
