Received: by 10.236.157.10 with SMTP id n10mr973297yhk.102.1310132650816;
        Fri, 08 Jul 2011 06:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: django-users@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.91.160.20 with SMTP id m20ls345990ago.0.gmail; Fri, 08 Jul
 2011 06:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.236.95.133 with SMTP id p5mr937736yhf.171.1310132611934;
        Fri, 08 Jul 2011 06:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.236.95.133 with SMTP id p5mr937735yhf.171.1310132611919;
        Fri, 08 Jul 2011 06:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <f...@foxwhisper.co.uk>
Received: from mail-gw0-f53.google.com (mail-gw0-f53.google.com [74.125.83.53])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c22si4091131yhe.0.2011.07.08.06.43.31
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Fri, 08 Jul 2011 06:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 74.125.83.53 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of f...@foxwhisper.co.uk) client-ip=74.125.83.53;
Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 74.125.83.53 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of f...@foxwhisper.co.uk) smtp.mail=f...@foxwhisper.co.uk
Received: by gwj20 with SMTP id 20so908301gwj.12
        for <django-users@googlegroups.com>; Fri, 08 Jul 2011 06:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.90.62.4 with SMTP id k4mr2007104aga.53.1310132611531;
        Fri, 08 Jul 2011 06:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <f...@foxwhisper.co.uk>
Received: from mail-yw0-f46.google.com (mail-yw0-f46.google.com [209.85.213.46])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id o7sm700899ang.20.2011.07.08.06.43.31
        (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Fri, 08 Jul 2011 06:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ywe9 with SMTP id 9so971726ywe.5
        for <django-users@googlegroups.com>; Fri, 08 Jul 2011 06:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.150.220.17 with SMTP id s17mr1956613ybg.156.1310132611016;
 Fri, 08 Jul 2011 06:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.151.156.4 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 06:43:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [86.155.47.221]
In-Reply-To: <CAFHbX1Lytp0f=tPdsyq3NeaKqY5sWqgq2jcFjN9Q0dLHkZd...@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALvtuFTxdr+dyyZb601YeY7U7fEAsJ0C8ObqNQoGH-RdDZB...@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFHbX1Lytp0f=tPdsyq3NeaKqY5sWqgq2jcFjN9Q0dLHkZd...@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 14:43:30 +0100
Message-ID: <CALvtuFQ0HH59_pR8RnQnrr8JUkGt6SHRaFOnrP6DrvHRS5B...@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Limiting the address space of any other binary..?
From: "Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]" <cal.leem...@simplicitymedialtd.co.uk>
To: django-users@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Thank you for taking the time to reply though!

On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Tom Evans <tevans...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd]
> <cal.leem...@simplicitymedialtd.co.uk> wrote:
>> Hi Roberto,
>>
>> Wonder if you might be able to give me some advice..
>>
>> Is there is a way to limit the address space of any other binary,
>> without relying on /etc/security/limits.conf??
>>
>> For example, is it possible to do something like this:
>>
>> ./magic-here --limit-as=256M -- /usr/sbin/some-legacy-binary-here
>>
>> ^^ that would then wrap the binary, enforcing a maximum address space of 256M.
>>
>> As you gave the option --limit-as to uwsgi, which can apply to any
>> python webapp, I was wondering if it's possible for us to do the same,
>> but without compiling the original binary into uwsgi.
>>
>> Let me know if the above doesn't make any sense lol.
>>
>> Cal
>>
>
> ulimit -a
>
> Eg: ulimit -s 4096
>
> Cheers
>
> Tom
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
>
>