From owner-freebsd-current Fri Jul 31 23:22:45 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA08078 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Fri, 31 Jul 1998 23:22:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [195.8.133.1] (may be forged)) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA08070 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 1998 23:22:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA02246; Sat, 1 Aug 1998 08:18:56 +0200 (CEST) To: dg@root.com cc: Terry Lambert , green@zone.baldcom.net (Brian Feldman), mike@smith.net.au, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: flock(2) problem & fix In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 31 Jul 1998 20:39:15 PDT." <199808010339.UAA26788@implode.root.com> Date: Sat, 01 Aug 1998 08:18:54 +0200 Message-ID: <2244.901952334@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <199808010339.UAA26788@implode.root.com>, David Greenman writes: >>Anyway, suffice to say, I think exclusive locking a file without the >>intention *or possibility* of writing is an "ok thing to do". > > For what it's worth, I agree. I also asked Kirk McKusick, the author of >the advisory locking code, and he thinks similarly. I agree, it means "I need a consistent view of this file, don't mess with it." Which is a legitimate thing to ask for. -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." "ttyv0" -- What UNIX calls a $20K state-of-the-art, 3D, hi-res color terminal To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message