Re: fast-procmail (3.10-0) uploaded to master
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Guy Maor wrote:
> Santiago Vila Doncel <sanvila@unex.es> writes:
> > The only difference between this and the normal procmail is the
> > following: In config.h there is a line saying:
> >
> > /*#define NO_NFS_ATIME_HACK /* uncomment if you're definitely not using
> > NFS mounted filesystems and can't afford
> > procmail to sleep for 1 sec. before writing a mailbox */
>
> This is a pretty dangerous package. What's the big deal with the
> sleep 1? I would prefer you just get rid of it.
>
> I hope you have at least have lots of big warnings everywhere that say
> you will lose mail if you run this with NFS mounted /var/spool/mail.
There is a warning in the extended description field. There is also an
implicit "warning" due to the fact that it is for experimental. In fact I
was going to compile it for myself, but I thought it could be useful for
more people. Would "contrib" be a better place?
BTW: I noticed that procmail from Red-Hat has that line uncommented too,
so red-hat procmail is "equivalent" to this fast-procmail, but they don't
say a word about NFS.
I don't know which NFS implementations exactly have this bug that procmail
tries to avoid. Could somebody enlighten me?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: latin1
iQCVAgUBMyMKXiqK7IlOjMLFAQGkMgQArfJf6Yd+Bd95PCNvHa6iVL4WEmnWzEvN
IbiPoN9cAhDgwoBOT7auhmUHx8+ozxumVb3XO7va0yhi9uItyXcHQvF3bNhsPMSR
xGA3NNPrq+Vw7TbqYhjI2v10xaFwTk8G4zjYgFE6mbFcYrvIlfK8sVPcp9UchHtg
9ecrjhly4U4=
=wK9p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>
Reply to: