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 Message-Id: <4.3.1.2.20010129170117.02253ce8@pop.ma.ultranet.com> X-Sender: lhall@pop.ma.ultranet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:14:19 -0500 To: Daniel Barclay , cygwin@cygwin.com From: "Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" Subject: Re: long command lines In-Reply-To: <3A75E410.1E5421C3@digitalfocus.com> References: <3A70B734.A18289E@nuance.com> <3A70C7CB.AB0DA2BE@yahoo.com> <4.3.1.2.20010129110023.022b0468@pop.ma.ultranet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 04:43 PM 1/29/2001, 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? Why do you assume my response implies "attitude" on my part? You asked, "shouldn't bash keep reallocating (enlarging) its buffer until the pattern has been expanding, or until it runs out of memory?" From that, I concluded that you didn't know whether bash actually did this or not. Looking at the source would tell you, which is why I made that suggestion. If my laconic response offended you, sorry. Larry Hall lhall@rfk.com RFK Partners, Inc. http://www.rfk.com 118 Washington Street (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office Holliston, MA 01746 (508) 893-9889 - FAX -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple