Date: Fri, 1 Nov 1996 14:56:30 -0500 (EST) From: John Fieber <jfieber@indiana.edu> To: Mark Crispin <MRC@Panda.COM> Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: /var/mail SUMMARY Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.95.961101140827.13075A-100000@fallout.campusview.indiana.edu> In-Reply-To: <MailManager.846796721.5917.mrc@Ikkoku-Kan.Panda.COM>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Gee. Okay, now let me see if I have this straight: 1) For safety purposes, it is best for any process mucking with a user's mailbox to use *all* locking mechanism supported on the platform. 2) For a variety of debatable reasons, the standard mail spool policy in FreeBSD does not support .lock file locking. 3) Mark Crispin's software apparently assumes that .lock file locking is available on all platforms and thus encounters some problems on FreeBSD. 4) The meat of the debate is if and how the software should determine the available locking mechanisms. I gather that .lock file support is currently configured at compile time. 5) Most of this thread has been about mail spool policy which has little if anything to do with the issue at hand of detecting supported locking mechanism in an accurate and unobtrusive way. Is this correct? -john == jfieber@indiana.edu =========================================== == http://fallout.campusview.indiana.edu/~jfieber ================
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSI.3.95.961101140827.13075A-100000>