>> Ken Hornstein <[email protected]> wrote: >>But I have to ask why someone would want to run things this way. BSD >>systems - by definition - use flock() in /var/mail. If you run MH with >>dot locking for /var/mail, you're eventually going to lose mail, since >>the MDA will still use flock(), even if you don't. Not to mention other >>tools in ports that will be assuming flock() for /var/mail. > > I know the user was on FreeBSD, but a quick googling shows me that there > are a number of places that use dot-locking on the mail spool. Also, > it sounded like Martin was just testing things. Seems reasonable to > make it work.
My MDA (local mailer of sendmail) actually is very nice - it respects the dot lock put in /var/mail. While I was testing what is going on having a .lock in the folder nicely put off delivery. Which actually lead me to another thought: maybe we should at least _respect_ dot lock (i.e. do not allow writing to a dotlocked file) but create dot lock only if that particular locking is requested. A quick look at the mail.local source code makes me believe that it actually first creates a .lock file and then proceeds with flock(). So it uses two kinds of locking at the same time. //Marcin _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
