Re: problem with folder locking: procmail and pine
Hi,
>>"Malc" == Malc Arnold <malc@thing.demon.co.uk> writes:
Malc> On 2 Mar, John Goerzen wrote:
>> On Mar 2, Santiago Vila Doncel wrote:
>>
>> > Debian procmail is patched to use *only* dot locking, as mandated
>> by Debian policy manual, 4.3.
>>
>> Hmm, is it just me or does that seem a little silly?
>>
>> What's wrong with using dot-locking in conjunction with
>> fcntl/flock?
Malc> It blows up horribly if /var/spool/mail (or the local
Malc> equivalent) is mounted via NFS. Dot-locking is the *only*
Malc> reliable locking mechanism in that case; and since a Debian
Malc> package can't know in advance what its run-time environment
Malc> should be, then it shouldn't use any locking mechanism except
Malc> .lock files.
Could you please elaborate on ``blows up horribly''? I was
under the impression that fcntl/flock would fail if the file were NFS
mounted, in which case the dot locking mechanism ensured exclusive
access, and for local files either method by itself would work.
In other words, using both methods would not be harmful, which
is contrary to what ``blows up horribly'' conveys to me.
manoj
--
"This is no time for consensus government. It's a time for
leadership. The average citizen doesn't know what the stakes are in
Vietnam." Richard M. Nixon, February 11, 1965
Manoj Srivastava <url:mailto:srivasta@acm.org>
Mobile, Alabama USA <url:http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Reply to: