On Wed, 22 Oct 2003, Eduardo Chappa wrote:
There is no
way I can predict what a user will do when using Pine, and you must know
very well that ignoring a possible case is one of the main reasons why
users report bugs, so I would like to offer a full featured (or as much
complete as possible)
]
Subject: Re: Cygwin patches for 2002e
*** Mark Crispin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote today:
:) On Wed, 22 Oct 2003, Eduardo Chappa wrote:
:) There is no way I can predict what a user will do when using Pine,
:) and you must know very well that ignoring a possible case is one of
:) the main
*** Gregory Hicks ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote today:
:) I think what Mark was saying was that simultaneous access to an mbx
:) mailbox from various incarnations of pine MAY not work correctly under
:) an MS-DOS implementation of windows.
:)
:) If only one incarnation of pine is running, the mbx
On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 10:52:22AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote:
*** Mark Crispin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote today:
:) Once again...
:)
:) Simultaneous access in the mbx format requires meaningful file locking.
:)
:) There is no such thing as meaningful file locking in Windows 98.
:) Windows
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003, Gregory Hicks wrote:
I think what Mark was saying was that simultaneous access to an mbx
mailbox from various incarnations of pine MAY not work correctly under
an MS-DOS implementation of windows.
If only one incarnation of pine is running, the mbx SHOULD be readable.
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003, Abe Backus wrote:
1) the flock simulator for cygwin in flockcyg.c has the same limitations as
the flock simulator for NT, so the code should only lock on one byte in the
file. The person that brought this to my attention would prefer that the
code lock the last possible
*** Mark Crispin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote today:
:) On Tue, 21 Oct 2003, Abe Backus wrote:
:) 1) the flock simulator for cygwin in flockcyg.c has the same
:) limitations as the flock simulator for NT, so the code should only
:) lock on one byte in the file. The person that brought this
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003, Eduardo Chappa wrote:
One question, though. If your hunch is correct, I see that LockFileEx is
only implemented on Windows NT, 2000 and XP, so how does this patch work
in Windows 98?
There is no such thing as meaningful file locking in Windows 98. Win98 is
not a real
