From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Jan  4 16:54:17 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id QAA05761 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 4 Jan 1995 16:54:17 -0800
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.223.46]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with ESMTP id QAA05755 for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 4 Jan 1995 16:54:16 -0800
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA01472; Wed, 4 Jan 1995 16:52:42 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: time.cdrom.com: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol
To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.sax.de
cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org (FreeBSD hackers)
Subject: Re: Never mind on the "mcopy busy" 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 04 Jan 95 16:17:23 +0100."
             <199501041517.QAA04662@bonnie.tcd-dresden.de> 
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 1995 16:52:42 -0800
Message-ID: <1471.789267162@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

> I've noticed that FreeBSD 2's flock() is binary incompatible with
> FreeBSD 1.1.5's.  My older copy of elm refuses to work now under 2.0,
> i get an `flock: invalid argument'.
> 
> I hope it isn't intention for FreeBSD 2 to be binary incompatible to
> its ancestors? :-/

No, definitely not.  Take a look at the old flock() system call - it
should be compatible!  If it's not, it need fixing.

					Jordan