On Jun 19, 2007, at 1:48 PM, Rob Campbell wrote:
Is this limit intentional or can it be removed?
The answer to your question is "yes", because it's the "or" of two
subquestions, and the answer to both of them is "yes". :-)
The limit is "intentional", in the sense that the code has an explicit
limit of 100 ranges in it.
The limit can be removed, in the sense that the array edit uses to
hold ranges can be made a dynamically expandable array rather than the
current statically-allocated fixed-size array.
Is this a unix/linux limitation?
No. The OS kernel and shell limitations would have prevented you from
running the command in the first place, and even in the feeblest of
systems they're big enough for 100 ranges. (In the best of systems
you can pass a megabyte or more of command-line arguments; SunOS 4.0
had a 1-megabyte limitation, about *20 years ago*, and many other
Un*xes *STILL* have smaller limits, sigh.)
