artswrapper defanged

[Martijn Klingens]

On Friday 12 July 2002 13:43, Neil Stevens wrote:
> In the first case, it doesn't matter what the user runs with artswrapper,
> because he's a good trustworthy individual.  This is the common case of a
> single-user home desktop.

Actually I wonder if it's good marketing if a user can bring the system down 
by firing up four mpeg movies at once. I personally think that applications 
started by a user should in no event bring down the system.

I wonder if it's technically feasible, because essentially I'm asking for 
'almost real-time' scheduling in the sense that the real-time scheduled 
processes _together_ may never eat more than, say 90% cpu, leaving at least 
10% for the kernel and a little bit of responsiveness that is hopefully 
enough to kill the mpegs that you started.

Whether you started the mpegs on purpose or by accident is hard to determine, 
and bringing the OS down due to an accident sounds bad to me.

Question still is, is the above possible at all, or is realtime scheduling an 
all-or-nothing approach? In the latter case I agree with Neil that 
single-user systems better use it and assume it won't break too much. In the 
former case I don't agree with Neil however.
-- 
Martijn