[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: MUAs and Locking Was: Re: PROPOSED: slight change to wnpp procedures

On Wed, Sep 26, 2001 at 02:33:04AM -0500, Scott Dier wrote:
> * Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> [010925 22:59]:
> > Why, btw, are you uploading a NEW package with the maintainer set to -qa,
> > especially when -qa has already asked for the package to be removed from
> It's absouletly horrid code to look at and has a locking scheme I wish
> not to overhaul to get into the fnctl, then dotlock policy.
> Right now it seems to dotlock only, never fnctl.
> It might not be a bad idea for MUA maintainers to check on how their
> packages handle the munging of mailboxes.  This can be a pretty
> 'critical' thing because users using NFS mounted mailspools can quickly
> lose whole spools with bad locking practices.

This is well and good, but offtopic.  This thread isn't (supposed to be)
about "xmailtool", it's about ITP bug reports being in a state that more
accurately represents what's going on with the corresponding packages.

I posted no ITP for xmailtool, for two reasons:

1) It wasn't really "new", since madison knew about it, and it exists
   in the current release of Debian; and
2) I wasn't sure I wanted to maintain it.

If xmailtool implements brain-dead mail locking, I'm pretty sure I don't
want to dirty my hands with it.

G. Branden Robinson                |     If you have the slightest bit of
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     intellectual integrity you cannot
branden@debian.org                 |     support the government.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |     -- anonymous

Attachment: pgpIycguzS62g.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: