On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:02:30 +0200 Goran Mekic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The program isn't how we'd do it for all sorts of reasons (it's not > > correct, reliable or error-safe). If we were to introduce locking, > > we'd make fetchers output to stdout instead of a file and move the > > file handling into the C++ code. > > > Is there some paper about this? I mean, the reasons why > programs like flock are not correct?
flock isn't NFS-safe. The lockf system call is NFS-safe, given sufficiently modern NFS implementations, but only does exclusive locks, which makes things slightly trickier. > Second question is if file > locking is an option, anyway. I mean, it maybe breaks some future > plans or such? Locking done on the C++ side, with fetchers changed to output to stdout, is an option. Locking in individual fetchers isn't, since it makes them much more complicated and unreliable and requires different fetchers to share a common locking protocol. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ paludis-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pioto.org/mailman/listinfo/paludis-user
