Bug #1328
closed
[PATCH]
0%
Description
I am attempting to compile FreeSWITCH (http://www.freeswitch.org/).
I get the following error.
Compiling src/switch_core.c ...
src/switch_core.c: In function `switch_core_setrlimits':
src/switch_core.c:795: error: `RLIMIT_AS' undeclared (first use in this
function)Some of the other BSDs apparently don't have it either but FreeBSD has
it defined in /usr/include/sys/resource.h as
#define RLIMIT_AS RLIMIT_VMEM /* standard name for RLIMIT_VMEM */Apparently it is also defined in Linux as well.
Should this be added to DragonFly?
Files
Updated by alexh almost 15 years ago
In my opinion this should be fixed in FreeSWITCH by changing RLIMIT_AS to
RLIMIT_VMEM. If this is in pkgsrc, it should be fixed there.
Neither NetBSD nor OpenBSD have RLIMIT_AS and there is no need for it if it'll be
just the same as RLIMIT_VMEM.
Updated by alexh almost 15 years ago
I've just seen that RLIMIT_AS is actually POSIX:
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/getrlimit.html
So we should add it. It'll probably happen during GSoC (POSIX Compliance Project).
Updated by vince.dragonfly almost 15 years ago
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 09:57:49AM +0000, Alex Hornung (via DragonFly issue tracker) wrote:
Alex Hornung <ahornung@gmail.com> added the comment:
In my opinion this should be fixed in FreeSWITCH by changing RLIMIT_AS to
RLIMIT_VMEM. If this is in pkgsrc, it should be fixed there.
Neither NetBSD nor OpenBSD have RLIMIT_AS and there is no need for it if it'll be
just the same as RLIMIT_VMEM.
Actually, it turns out that NetBSD does have it also.
resource.h:
#define RLIMIT_AS 10 /* virtual process size (inclusive of mmap) /
#define RLIMIT_VMEM RLIMIT_AS / common alias */
OpenBSD seems to be the only one that does not have it.
By the way, FreeSWITCH is not in pkgsrc. I was trying to compile it
natively. However, the RLIMIT_AS issue was not the only one. Every
time I fixed one problem there was another. Apparently it is very Linux
centric. I don't have a lot of time to work on it so I gave up for now
and am going to take a closer look at yate.
On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 06:44:51AM +0000, Alex Hornung (via DragonFly issue tracker) wrote:
Alex Hornung <ahornung@gmail.com> added the comment:
I've just seen that RLIMIT_AS is actually POSIX:
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/getrlimit.htmlSo we should add it. It'll probably happen during GSoC (POSIX Compliance Project).
Thanks for following up on this. It is looking to me like RLIMIT_AS is (or is
becoming?) more of the standard and RLIMIT_VMEM is BSD specific. I do not
see any mention of RLIMIT_VMEM in the posix specifications and Linux does not
seem to support it either. At least it did not show up when I grep'd the
Linux headers under /archive/Linux-2.6.13.1 on leaf for it.
Updated by alexh almost 15 years ago
RLIMIT_AS definitely seems to be the only real standard here, so I would suggest
to add it for POSIX compliance.
This is Beket's expertise, so I'll just leave it like this.
Updated by Anonymous almost 15 years ago
: RLIMIT_AS definitely seems to be the only real standard here,
: so I would suggest to add it for POSIX compliance.
:
: This is Beket's expertise, so I'll just leave it like this.
Sorry for the delayed response, grabbed!
Cheers,
Stathis
Updated by Anonymous almost 15 years ago
: RLIMIT_AS definitely seems to be the only real standard here,
Anyone any thoughts regarding the attached patch ?
Cheers,
Stathis
Updated by Anonymous almost 15 years ago
RLIMIT_AS definitely seems to be the only real standard here,
Anyone any thoughts regarding the attached patch ?
Unless no one objects in the next couple of days, I'll push it.
Cheers,
Stathis
Updated by Anonymous almost 15 years ago
RLIMIT_AS definitely seems to be the only real standard here,
Committed !
a874e0b7827b04e8d4e0d2454639e2fd9aa33220
Updated by dillon almost 15 years ago
:Stathis Kamperis <ekamperi@gmail.com> added the comment:
:
:: RLIMIT_AS definitely seems to be the only real standard here,
:
:Anyone any thoughts regarding the attached patch ?
:
:Cheers,
:Stathis
This might create issues if a pkgsrc package is switch()ing on
the RLIMIT cases and tries to switch on both RLIMIT_VMEM and
RLIMIT_AS.If RLIMIT_VMEM is not used as much we might be able to just
flat-out rename it to RLIMIT_AS. The question is whether it
would be beneficial to the pkgsrc build or not.-Matt