Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 13:18:09 +0900 (JST) From: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: FreeBSD Hackers <hackers@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: flock/sendmail stuffup Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.93.961003131442.13332C-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp> In-Reply-To: <199610011800.LAA02000@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 1 Oct 1996, Terry Lambert wrote: > > flock also has better semantics. I think fcntl() still releases all locks > > when any one process closes the file. To be more precise, locks shouldn't be released until last close(). With fcntl()/posix locking semantics it does it the bogus way. > I will have to check it. If it does, it is in error. Locks must be > explicitly released, or there is an implied release on decrement of > reference count from 1->0. In other words, it's in the close() code, > not the exit code that calls the close code. Regards, Mike Hancock
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SV4.3.93.961003131442.13332C-100000>