From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Aug 24 10: 5:34 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from peach.ocn.ne.jp (peach.ocn.ne.jp [210.145.254.87]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09AAC15AD1 for ; Tue, 24 Aug 1999 09:59:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dcs@newsguy.com) Received: from newsguy.com by peach.ocn.ne.jp (8.9.1a/OCN) id XAA21207; Tue, 24 Aug 1999 23:51:55 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <37C2B148.60FB81FA@newsguy.com> Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 23:50:48 +0900 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,pt-BR,ja MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christopher Masto Cc: FreeBSD Hackers Subject: Re: Mandatory locking? References: <19990823231130.A16133@netmonger.net> <19990823232726.B16133@netmonger.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Christopher Masto wrote: > > Exactly. You said that mandatory locking means that user A's correct > use of locking means that user B doesn't have to be careful. That's > not the case, since A can step in between B's read and write. A's > mandatory lock doesn't help. > > I don't see the use for it. :-) The thing is SO obviously flawed, that I wonder how many marketoid drones it took to make sensible people think it is actually useful. :-) -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org - Come on. - Where are we going? - To get what you came for. - What's that? - Me. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message