> > > * userland issues (what, you thought that limits on the
> > > command size will go away?)
> >
> > Last I checked, the command line size limit wasn't a userland issue, but
> > rather a limit of the kernel exec(). This might have changed.
>
> I _really_ don't want to trust the ability of shell to deal with long
> command lines. I also don't like the failure modes with history expansion
> causing OOM, etc.
>
> AFAICS right now we hit the kernel limit first, but I really doubt that
> raising said limit is a good idea.
I am running with 2MB limit right now. I doubt 2MB will lead to OOM.
> xargs is there for purpose...
xargs is very ugly. I want to rm 12*. Just plain "rm 12*". *Not* "find
. -name "12*" | xargs rm, which has terrible issues with files names
"xyzzy"
"bla"
"xyzzy bla"
"12 xyzzy bla"
!
I do not want to deal with xargs. Xargs was made to workaround
limitation at command line size (and is broken in itself). Now we have
hardware that can handle bigger commandlines just fine, xargs should
be killed.
Pavel
-- The best software in life is free (not shareware)! Pavel GCM d? s-: !g p?:+ au- a--@ w+ v- C++@ UL+++ L++ N++ E++ W--- M- Y- R+ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/