From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat May 15 04:00:16 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id EF22916A4CE; Sat, 15 May 2004 04:00:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huva.hittite.isp.9tel.net (huva.hittite.isp.9tel.net
	[62.62.156.28])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 414FC43D53; Sat, 15 May 2004 04:00:16 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from clefevre-lists@9online.fr)
Received: from pc2k (178-116-118-80.kaptech.net [80.118.116.178])
	by huva.hittite.isp.9tel.net (Postfix) with SMTP
	id 83E8B9D971; Sat, 15 May 2004 13:01:38 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <042601c43a6b$cd1cb9a0$7890a8c0@dyndns.org>
From: "Cyrille Lefevre" <clefevre-lists@9online.fr>
To: "Yar Tikhiy" <yar@comp.chem.msu.su>, <arch@freebsd.org>,
	<hackers@freebsd.org>
References: <20040515092114.GB67531@comp.chem.msu.su>
Date: Sat, 15 May 2004 13:00:13 +0200
Organization: ACME
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
Subject: Re: Interoperation of flock(2), fcntl(2), and lockf(3)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 May 2004 11:00:17 -0000

"Yar Tikhiy" <yar@comp.chem.msu.su> wrote:
[snip]
> Considering all the above, I'd like to add the following paragraph
> to the flock(2), lockf(3), and fcntl(2) man pages (replacing the
> sentence quoted from lockf(3)):
> 
> The flock(2), fcntl(2), and lockf(3) locks are compatible.
> Processes using different locking interfaces can cooperate
> over the same file safely.  However, only one of such
> interfaces should be used within a process.  If a file is

s/a process/the same process/ ?

> locked by a process through flock(2), any record within the
> file will be seen as locked from the viewpoint of another
> process using fcntl(2) or lockf(3), and vice versa.

Cyrille Lefevre.
-- 
home: mailto:cyrille.lefevre@laposte.net