Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 20:30:09 GMT From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bin/111101: /usr/bin/lockf: when lockf blocks due to another lockf and no -k is specified and the other lockf ends, the file is away Message-ID: <200704012030.l31KU9Ol080335@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR bin/111101; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: "R. B. Riddick" <arne_woerner@yahoo.com> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bin/111101: /usr/bin/lockf: when lockf blocks due to another lockf and no -k is specified and the other lockf ends, the file is away Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 16:21:12 -0400 On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 01:18:44PM -0700, R. B. Riddick wrote: > --- Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 01:11:04PM -0700, R. B. Riddick wrote: > > OK, if you dont want to pursue a documentation improvement then I'll > > close the PR. > > > Then I will continue to think, that lockf without -k is useless in many cases > and very f?nny/surprising/und?cumented. That's fine, the question is whether you are going to do something about improving the documentation that you feel is insufficient. Please advise :) Kris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200704012030.l31KU9Ol080335>