Re: [dev] slock: anti OOM killer - proper priv dropping - etc.

2013-08-02 Thread Anselm R Garbe
Hi Robert, On 28 July 2013 15:47, Robert Schneider wrote: >> If Robert provides the patch with ifdef __linux__ specificness, I >> might consider adding it. Thanks applied. It will be part of the upcoming 1.2 release. Best regards, Anselm

RE: [dev] slock: anti OOM killer - proper priv dropping - etc.

2013-07-28 Thread Robert Schneider
> If Robert provides the patch with ifdef __linux__ specificness, I > might consider adding it. Here's the ifdef'ed patch. -- ziggomatic 1_dontkillme_v3.patch Description: Binary data

Re: [dev] slock: anti OOM killer - proper priv dropping - etc.

2013-07-28 Thread Anselm R Garbe
On 26 July 2013 00:46, Joerg Jung wrote: > Am 23.07.2013 um 15:50 schrieb Robert Schneider : > I think this unportable and totally linux specific, > hence shoul be in an ifdef linux or something. If Robert provides the patch with ifdef __linux__ specificness, I might consider adding it. Linux is

Re: [dev] slock: anti OOM killer - proper priv dropping - etc.

2013-07-26 Thread koneu
On 26.07.2013, at 14:56, Robert Schneider wrote: > I don't see how scheduler priority has much influence on OOM killing. Ya I just realized it after I sent the reply… Turns out however, that it DOES. At least it says so here: http://blog.singhanuvrat.com/tech/the-linux-oom-killer … However this

RE: [dev] slock: anti OOM killer - proper priv dropping - etc.

2013-07-26 Thread Robert Schneider
>> hence shoul be in an ifdef linux or something. On the other hand the code is just "Does the proc file exist? No? Then skip this." But yes it could be wrapped in #ifdef __linux__ sections. > Or use setpriority() to make it portable. I don't see how scheduler priority has much influence on OOM

Re: [dev] slock: anti OOM killer - proper priv dropping - etc.

2013-07-25 Thread koneu
On 26.07.2013, at 00:46, Joerg Jung wrote: > > hence shoul be in an ifdef linux or something. > Or use setpriority() to make it portable. ~koneu

Re: [dev] slock: anti OOM killer - proper priv dropping - etc.

2013-07-25 Thread Joerg Jung
Am 23.07.2013 um 15:50 schrieb Robert Schneider : >> In dontkillme(), wouldn't it be desirable to close the file descriptor? > > Shit, good catch. [1_dontkillme_v2.patch] > -- > ziggomatic > <1_dontkillme_v2.patch> I think this unportable and totally linux specific, h

RE: [dev] slock: anti OOM killer - proper priv dropping - etc.

2013-07-23 Thread Robert Schneider
> In dontkillme(), wouldn't it be desirable to close the file descriptor? Shit, good catch. [1_dontkillme_v2.patch] -- ziggomatic 1_dontkillme_v2.patch Description: Binary data

Re: [dev] slock: anti OOM killer - proper priv dropping - etc.

2013-07-23 Thread koneu
In dontkillme(), wouldn't it be desirable to close the file descriptor? ~koneu On 22.07.2013, at 19:37, Robert Schneider wrote: > 0_smallstuff.patch: Fix missing newlines and so on. > > 1_dontkillme.patch: Disable Linux's out-of-memory killer for slock if > the system has the configuration kno

[dev] slock: anti OOM killer - proper priv dropping - etc.

2013-07-22 Thread Robert Schneider
0_smallstuff.patch: Fix missing newlines and so on. 1_dontkillme.patch: Disable Linux's out-of-memory killer for slock if the system has the configuration knob. That douche hunts small game! Oh how super fun to come back to an unlocked desktop. 2_dropprivs.patch: Only try dropping privileges if p