Re: OpenVMS getdtablesize.c

[Paul Eggert]

Bruno Haible wrote:
> > If I have a replacement getdtablesize() return 65535, that could cause
> > programs to assume that they could actually open that many descriptors.
> This is only a theoretical risk. I know of no programs that are that
> aggressive.

Although GNU 'sort' does something like that, it has code to deal with later 
'open' failures due to EMFILE and/or ENFILE. Any program that allocates file 
descriptors that aggressively really needs to deal with 'open' failures that can 
occur regardless of what getdtablesize returns.