RE: Larger dev_t

[Anton Altaparmakov]

At 17:54 25/03/2001, Michel Wilson wrote:
> > Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > > You are just delaying the problem then, at some point your uptime will
> > > be large enough that you have run through all 64bit pids for example.
> >
> > 64 bits is enough to fork 1 million processes per second for over
> > 500,000 years.  I think that's putting the problem off far enough.
> >
> > -Mitch
> > -
>Ever thought about how you would kill a process: kill -9 127892752 doesn't
>sound very appealing to me.
>So you'd also need to implement a mechanism that allows for 'easy' selection
>of processes to kill, for example giving every process with the same name
>a unique identifier (like httpd_0, httpd_1, httpd_2 and so on).

Ever heard of cut-and-paste? Surely you can afford a mouse... And for when 
you you are not inputting manually but running a script/whatever, who cares 
what the numbers are...

Cheers,

         Anton

-- 
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @)
Linux NTFS Maintainer / WWW: http://sourceforge.net/projects/linux-ntfs/
ICQ: 8561279 / WWW: http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/