Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sources.redhat.com Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 16:59:42 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: long command lines Message-ID: <20010129165942.N30941@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <3A70B734.A18289E@nuance.com> <3A70C7CB.AB0DA2BE@yahoo.com> <4.3.1.2.20010129110023.022b0468@pop.ma.ultranet.com> <3A75E410.1E5421C3@digitalfocus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i In-Reply-To: <3A75E410.1E5421C3@digitalfocus.com>; from Daniel.Barclay@digitalfocus.com on Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:43:44PM -0500 On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 04:43:44PM -0500, Daniel Barclay wrote: >"Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" wrote: >> >> At 10:52 AM 1/29/2001, Daniel Barclay wrote: >> >... >> >I thought GNU software tried to avoid arbitrary limit like that. Shouldn't >> >the only limit be virtual memory? >> > >> >That is, shouldn't bash keep reallocating (enlarging) its buffer until the >> >pattern has been expanding, or until it runs out of memory? >> >> I'm sure you can find your answer in the source if you're interested. > >What's up with your attitude? What, specifically, are you objecting to? The suggestion that you could figure this out for yourself by looking at the sources? Or were you assuming that Larry knew the answer and was selfishly withholding information? cgf -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple