| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <200902262248.26713.elendil@planet.nl> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 22:48:25 +0100 From: Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Cc: libpam-modules@...kages.debian.org, debian-admin@...ts.debian.org Subject: Re: 2.6.28, rlimits, performance and debian etch Steve Langasek wrote: > It has already been mentioned that this does not apply to the upcoming > Debian 5.0 release (lenny); this patch is only present in the 4.0 > release (etch), it was actually fixed in the development series to not > use RLIM_INFINITY *because* previous kernels didn't support this and > would cause pam_limits to throw log warnings. I've just migrated my home servers from Debian etch to lenny and bind9 now gives me this: named[17207]: max open files (1024) is smaller than max sockets (4096) Redhat's BTS [1] tells me this is a kernel issue thatshould be solved [2] by the "rlimit: permit setting RLIMIT_NOFILE to RLIM_INFINITY" patch in 2.6.28. One of my servers (DNS slave) is running the standard Debian 2.6.26 kernel, the other (DNS master) is running 2.6.29-rc6 so that does include that patch. But both show the error! I'd appreciate your input where to take this. Cheers, FJP [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477540 [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461458 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists