Lars Wirzenius wrote:
[replying to the list instead of privately, since this is of common
interest, IMHO :-]
>> If the protocol in the publib library has a way to get around that
>> problem, I'd be interesting in learning more about it (and, possibly,
>> dreaming up cases in which it might fail :
According to Karl M. Hegbloom:
> > "Miquel" == Miquel van Smoorenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Miquel> I now have open() in a preloaded library, /lib/nfslock.so
> Miquel> that gets preloaded on all our machines through
> Miquel> /etc/ld.so.preload. Does about the same thing,
> "Miquel" == Miquel van Smoorenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Miquel> I now have open() in a preloaded library, /lib/nfslock.so
Miquel> that gets preloaded on all our machines through
Miquel> /etc/ld.so.preload. Does about the same thing, and lets us
Miquel> safely share mai
> "Christian" == Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> What happens? Can you describe the problem? Explain your
>> setup in more detail, please. I would like to know more about
>> the problems that are encountered with nfs.
Christian> The servers receives all ma
On 20 Jun 1997, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> > "Christian" == Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Christian> This is buggy since it's not working over NFS. (I'm
> Christian> running into problems every few days since I use
> Christian> sendmail/procmail/pine over a NFS
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>--==_Exmh_970021023P
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>[ Please don't Cc: public replies to me. ]
>
>Karl M. Hegbloom:
>> What happens? Can you describe the problem? Explain your setup in
>> more detail, pleas
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>--==_Exmh_970021023P
>> Publib uses the return value from the stat call, which
>> you're not supposed to do. (I don't know why yet.)
>
>I check that the link count is two to see if I managed to create
>the lock file with li
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Hmm, but why would that cause a problem with mailers/programs that use
> lockfile locking *and* flock/fcntl locking at the same time?
Last time this discussion came up, Bruce found some info in the debian mail
archive related to this. Can't find it now, though. If I rem
John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> However, why is it bad if a given program (like Elm-ME+ which I
> maintain, which brought the issue to my attention this time) uses
> *both* locking mechanisms?
The only problem I know of is that with two locking schemes, if all
programs don't agree on t
However, why is it bad if a given program (like Elm-ME+ which I
maintain, which brought the issue to my attention this time) uses
*both* locking mechanisms?
Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Why are we using dotfile locking only? There are
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 20 Jun 1997, John Goerzen wrote:
> > I think flock can fail across NFS in certain situations, but I'm no
> > locking expert.
>
> Hmm, but why would that cause a problem with mailers/programs that use
> lockfile locking *and* flock/fcntl locking at the same t
Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Why are we using dotfile locking only? There are much better
> > mechanisms (flock, etc.) that should be used instead. I can see no
> > place where dotfile locking would work and flock-style locking would
This sounds good to me. When finished, we should announce this
on c.o.l.a. and try to see if the Red Had folks will adopt it as
well. If we both adopt it as policy, then it will live on forever!
-Erik
--
Erik B. Andersen Web:http://www.inconnect.com/~andersen/
email:
> "Christian" == Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Christian> This is buggy since it's not working over NFS. (I'm
Christian> running into problems every few days since I use
Christian> sendmail/procmail/pine over a NFS mounted
Christian> /var/spool/mail !)
Chri
: > Mailboxes are locked using the username.lock lockfile convention, rather
: > than fcntl, flock or lockf.
: This is buggy since it's not working over NFS. (I'm running into problems
: every few days since I use sendmail/procmail/pine over a NFS mounted
: /var/spool/mail !)
I am using exim/exi
Christian Schwarz wrote:
>AFAIK, there is at least one safe way to lock a file over NFS. The
>procedure is partially explained in the open(2) man page and is also
>implemented, for example, in your "publib" library.
I've dug deeper into the NFS protocol (RFC 1057 and RFC 1094) than is
good for m
On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> [ Please don't Cc: public replies to me. ]
>
> John Goerzen:
> > Why are we using dotfile locking only? There are much better
> > mechanisms (flock, etc.) that should be used instead. I can see no
> > place where dotfile locking would work and flock-
> "Rob" == Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rob> I think flock can fail across NFS in certain situations, but
Rob> I'm no locking expert.
You can read the man page to open(3) for a partial explaination.
--
Karl M. Hegbloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> finger or ytalk:
htt
John Goerzen wrote:
>Why are we using dotfile locking only? There are much better
>mechanisms (flock, etc.) that should be used instead. I can see no
>place where dotfile locking would work and flock-style locking would fail...
We don't have a lock daemon for NFS.
--
Thomas Koenig, [EMAIL PROT
John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why are we using dotfile locking only? There are much better
> mechanisms (flock, etc.) that should be used instead. I can see no
> place where dotfile locking would work and flock-style locking would
> fail...
I think flock can fail across NFS in cert
Why are we using dotfile locking only? There are much better
mechanisms (flock, etc.) that should be used instead. I can see no
place where dotfile locking would work and flock-style locking would fail...
--
John Goerzen | Running Debian GNU/Linux (www.debian.org)
Custom Programming
21 matches
Mail list logo
