Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 09:45:46 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, "David E. O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc crontab Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1001211094250.41424D-100000@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <200012110655.eBB6tQG42641@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Brian Somers wrote:
> And does ``lockf /var/run/periodic'' do the same thing ?
If the mode on /var/run/periodic is 0644 or 0755 or the like, yes. Any
user who can get an open file handle on a file system object can make use
of advisory locking. If you want to have a locking object that doesn't
allow joe user to lock it, it needs to be appropriately protected by
permissions. The current standing proposal for periodic seems to be a
/var/run/periodic.lock with mode 0600, owned by root.
However, for applications that generate their own lock files dynamically,
it would be nice if they used /var/run/${appname}/lockfile as well as
/var/run/${appname}/pidfile (or some variation on this theme). This way
as we break down use of root privilege, we don't have to break filename
compatibility and all that. This suggests that /var/run/periodic/lockfile
or /var/periodic/lockfile would both be fine.
Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project
robert@fledge.watson.org NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96L.1001211094250.41424D-100000>