On Mon, Jun 14, 2004 at 08:02:41AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > > How will fcntl() work with this? flock() isn't on a bunch of platforms, so > > fcntl() is probably the more portable solution. > > > > For fcntl(), we open it for exclusive read and then unlink it right away - > > how > > do you plan on dealing with that? -- justin
Good point. > Read the patch and find out. :-) FCNTL is tested in the test program, > and it _does_ work, but only as a fork() mutex. flock was the one I > chose, just because I needed one that would work as a proc_exec mutex, > and fcntl doesn't. So to be clear, the answer to Justin's question is that your patch *doesn't* deal with this, and that APR_LOCK_PROC_CREATE_DEFAULT will be ENOTIMPL on e.g. Solaris and HP-UX? joe
