Re: flock() and sendmail
On Thu, 16 Nov 2006 11:24:34 -0800 (PST), Richard A Nelson
<cowboy@debian.org> wrote:
>>** NOTE: Override HASFLOCK as you will but, as of 1.99.6, mixed-style
>>** file locking is no longer allowed. In particular, make sure
>>** your DBM library and sendmail are both using either flock(2)
>>** *or* fcntl(2) file locking, but not both.
>
>This, indeed, is the important part ! DB has changed alot, and now
>has its own locking system, and whatever it uses to lock the entire
>DB is what should be used by its callers.
>Has DB changed from fcntl to flock ?
I don't know.
>Are you trying to access the sendmail databases from another
>program that has differing locking conventions ?
Not yet.
>You fail to provide any hints as to on why fcntl which is used instead
>of flock is causing you grief.
No grief yet. So far, I'm only studying your package to see what the
possibilities are.
I need to make some local customizations, and it seemed like a good
idea, while I'm in there, to use flock() instead of fcntl(), if there
are no conflicts.
DBM is obsoleted by Berkeley DB if I understand correctly, so maybe
the note about DBM won't matter to me. But there is still the
question of how Berkeley DB locking interacts with sendmail's use of
flock(), if at all.
Reply to: