Fork bombing a Linux machine as a non-root user

[David Curry]

Les Mikesell wrote:

>On Sat, 2005-03-19 at 21:29, David Curry wrote:
>  
>
>>>No, the assumption is that the person installing the OS, expert or
>>>not, knows more about it's capabilities than the person who
>>>built the distribution that will run on anything from a P100
>>>or less to a multi-cpu, multi-Ghz box.  
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Your interpretation would be much better supported if there was some 
>>documentation available to that "person installing the OS" which 
>>informed them of the default installation settings and advisability of 
>>resetting for specific installation characteristics.
>>    
>>
>
>I simply can't believe that anyone who is obviously on the
>internet and capable of joining a mailing list
>
How 'bout that!  And you know, a few people have even told me they think 
that on my goods days I can even manage to walk and chew gum at the same 
time on occasion! :-)

> can possibly think there is any lack of documentation available.
>
Again, you confirm my original premise - that much of the discussion 
under this thread implicitly assumed linux/unix experts are the ones 
installing the system.  You know!   That assumption stated in the lead 
in paragraph in the prior message which you elected to delete in 
drafting your reply.   The one that read,

"Discussion in this thread frequently reflected an unwarranted, 
underlying assumption.   Namely, that linux/unix experts are intalling 
the OS, know how the system will be used, and act immediately after 
installation to reset default installation resource limits to 
appropriate levels. It is obvious to me from thread discussion that that 
assumption is invalid. "

>  It is true
>that a free product generally does not come with a marketing
>force that will take you to lunch or golf and hold your hand
>while you learn about the product,
>
Your statement reflects uni-dimensional perception of costs and 
benefits.  Linux is "free" product to the non-expert only in the sense 
that it may be obtained without any explicit cash outlay for the 
acquisition.  But, there are boatloads of implicit costs the non-expert 
bears in attempting to install and use a linux operating system.  Time 
spent on the endeavor is NOT a free good.  The opportunity cost of the 
time spent by linux newcomers lacking prior familiarity with 
linuxeese/unixeese can be quite high as can be the payback to Red Hat 
for the expense it incurrs in lowering the acquisition cost of Red 
Hat/Fedora linux distributions and this user forum.

> but the ulimit concept has
>been documented for anyone who cares to read about it long
>before Linux was even around (remember how Linux is a free
>implementation of the unix API...).
>
>  
>
It is documented for those who know the word exists, yes.  That is, it 
is documented for the subset of linux users who have more than passing 
familiatity with unix/linux commands and operating system 
characteristics.  And, the particular default resource allocation 
parameters specific to Fedora Core releases were known only to its 
kernel developers and those users expert enough in linuxeese to use the 
ulimit command.