Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 15:29:35 -0400 From: Brian Fundakowski Feldman <green@freebsd.org> To: Stephen Hurd <shurd@sasktel.net> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Locking: kern/50827 Message-ID: <20040628192935.GF5635@green.homeunix.org> In-Reply-To: <20040624174919.46160f9e.shurd@sasktel.net> References: <20040624174919.46160f9e.shurd@sasktel.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 05:49:19PM -0600, Stephen Hurd wrote: > Well, possibly due to editorial content, kern/50827 has been completely > ignored. Not sure exactly the correct method of bringing something like > this up, but am I the only one who finds flock(), dotlock, and fcntl() > locks insufficient for their needs? Originally, this patch resulted from > porting a multi-threaded Win32 program to *nix... however, I've since used > the features it in a number of programs (for FreeBSD only of course) with > good success. It really makes locking behave as expected. > > Has anyone looked at this? Does anyone have any comments? > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/50827 I don't think you'll ever find anyone interested in file locking anymore. Since they're all advisory, anyway, you can just implement them at a higher level in your application. BSD and System V IPC mechanisms already are very good building blocks here for system-scoped locks. -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \'[ FreeBSD ]''''''''''\ <> green@FreeBSD.org \ The Power to Serve! \ Opinions expressed are my own. \,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040628192935.GF5635>