Re: Mutt loses mail
In article <cistron.19990103223308.A16568@complete.org>,
John Goerzen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>I notice at this point that it doesn't use the liblockfile package that
>policy heavily suggests it uses. Policy says:
> All Debian MUAs and MTAs have to use the `maillock' and `mailunlock'
> functions provided by the `liblockfile' packages to lock and unlock
> mail boxes. These functions implement a NFS-safe locking mechanism.
> (It is ok if MUAs and MTAs don't link against liblockfile but use a
> _compatible_ mechanism. Please compare the mechanisms very carefully!)
I read the source code of mutt's mutt_dotlock utility, and
the way it does locking is OK. However it does not do both dotlocking
AND lockf() which it should to guarantee consistency over NFS. But
neither does liblockfile right now. Yes, that's a bug.
Indifference will certainly be the downfall of mankind, but who cares?