limit nofile has no effect?

[Steve Langasek]

Hi Scott,

On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 11:13:44AM -0700, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Steve Langasek
> <steve.langasek at ubuntu.com>wrote:

> > James, Scott, has any thought been given to including uid/gid or user/group
> > as verbs in upstart jobs?  Seems to me this would be perfectly consistent
> > with the existing umask, nice, oom, chroot, and limit verbs.

> My stated opinion is that a "user" verb in upstart jobs should begin a PAM
> session - which seems to be not what you want ;-)

Why should upstart ever be involved with starting PAM sessions?  The very
idea makes me uncomfortable from a PAM perspective; it may just be my lack
of imagination, but I can't imagine a reason for an upstart job to
correspond to a PAM service.  OTOH, my imagination is working just fine in
coming up with ways that an init system playing with pam can go horribly
wrong. ;)

(Example: libpam occasionally adds new symbols that modules then depend on.
Upgrading libpam therefore requires restarting any processes that have the
library loaded persistently.  upstart doesn't currently save state on
restart...)

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 828 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/upstart-devel/attachments/20110613/d04ba0b9/attachment.pgp>