Re: Mixing flock() and lockfiles

At 20:55 96/07/03, Stephen R. van den Berg wrote:

> Indeed.  However, normally, if you compile procmail out of the box, it
> will use all known safe locking mechanisms (as far as can be determined
> at compile time).  That means, if your elm is using flock(), then
> procmail most likely is too (check with "procmail -v" or the manpage).
Ok, I checked both elm (elm -v) and procmail (procmail -v) and the both use
dotlocking and fcntl() and procmail also uses lockf().  Does that mean that
if I use the following recipe to write to my system mailbox:
        #the popserver uses the file /tmp/.<username>.pop
        :0:/tmp/.$LOGNAME.pop
        $DEFAULT

procmail will use fcntl() and lockf() (but not dotlocking) and I shouldn't
get a collision with either elm (due to fcntl()), nor the popserver (using
the same lockfile)?

Also, one of the comments about 3.11pre4 says that it allows users that
can't write to the system mail directory to lock their mail file.  Does
refer to the use of both fcntl() and lockf()?  Or is there another scheme
in 3.11pre4?

ray



-----
Ray DeGennaro
degennar(_at_)bmsrs(_dot_)usc(_dot_)edu
-----
Those who swap freedom for safety, deserve neither. (Benjamin Franklin)