Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-17 Thread David DeSimone
Marius Gedminas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > As a minor side issue: is there a way to save message to a *file* > (i.e. without the locking)? Dotlocking does not work on FAT > partitions... Well, you can press "v" (view-attachments), and then save the body of the message as a regular file. Y

Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-17 Thread Marius Gedminas
On Tue, Nov 16, 1999 at 06:09:17PM -0600, David DeSimone wrote: > Lalo Martins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Oh, one more tidbit: I _can_ save attachments. Go figure. > > That's because attachments are saved to *files*, while messages are > saved to *folders*. So attachments don't require

Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-17 Thread Mikko Hänninen
Roland Rosenfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Wed, 17 Nov 1999: > So flock(2) may not be the best idea if you want to access your mail > via NFS... Apparently. IMHO, any incoming mail folders which are accessed over NFS should be in Maildir format anyway, it's pretty much the only sane choice.

Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-17 Thread Dan Lipofsky
On Tue, Nov 16, 1999 at 03:52:11PM -0600, Dan Lipofsky wrote: > I am using mutt-1.0pre3us on Red Hat 6.1 Linux. When ever I try to > save a message to a file on a network file system I get > fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37) > If the file does not exist it successfull

Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-17 Thread Roland Rosenfeld
On Wed, 17 Nov 1999, Dirk Pirschel wrote: > > As a result, I pretty much always build mutt with --disable-fcntl > > --enable-flock on linux. > What is the difference between "fcntl" and "flock" ? The man page of flock(2) on my Linux system says: NOTES flock(2) does not lock files ove

Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-17 Thread Thomas Roessler
On 1999-11-16 18:09:17 -0600, David DeSimone wrote: > If you are *certain* that every mail-handling program at your site uses > the same dot-locking mechanism, you can reconfigure Mutt with > --disable-fcntl, and then you won't have this problem. But if you're > wrong, and there is some program

Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-17 Thread Stephan Seitz
Hi! On Die, Nov 16, 1999 at 09:05:02 -0200, Lalo Martins wrote > Copying to falcon/teste...lockd: failed to monitor 192.168.0.76 > fcntl: No available locks (errno = 79) Is knfs compiled with --enable-secure-statd? If yes, disable it. Shade and sweet water! Stephan -- | Stephan Seitz

Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-17 Thread Dirk Pirschel
On Tue, 16 Nov 1999, Joshua Rodman wrote: > As a result, I pretty much always build mutt with --disable-fcntl > --enable-flock on linux. What is the difference between "fcntl" and "flock" ? CU Dirk -- Dirk Pirschel E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP key on request) Linux - Less bugs for less buc

Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-17 Thread Roland Rosenfeld
On Tue, 16 Nov 1999, Dan Lipofsky wrote: > I am using mutt-1.0pre3us on Red Hat 6.1 Linux. When ever I try to > save a message to a file on a network file system I get > fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37) > If the file does not exist it successfully creates it but leaves

Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-16 Thread David DeSimone
Lalo Martins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Oh, one more tidbit: I _can_ save attachments. Go figure. That's because attachments are saved to *files*, while messages are saved to *folders*. So attachments don't require any locking (unless you're saving a message/rfc822 type, which is a message

Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-16 Thread Lalo Martins
Oh, one more tidbit: I _can_ save attachments. Go figure. []s, |alo + -- I am Lalo of deB-org. You will be freed. Resistance is futile. http://www.webcom.com/lalo mailto:

Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-16 Thread Mikko Hänninen
Lalo Martins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Tue, 16 Nov 1999: > Copying to falcon/teste...lockd: failed to monitor 192.168.0.76 > fcntl: No available locks (errno = 79) > > So it is a lockd issue. I don't run a lockd. > > (Debian, mutt 1.0pre3-1.2 - newer ones didn't compile on the > sparc port, i

Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-16 Thread Lalo Martins
On Tue, Nov 16, 1999 at 08:07:30PM -0200, Lalo Martins wrote: > > ditto Ok, ``me too''s suck :-) more info: Copying to falcon/teste...lockd: failed to monitor 192.168.0.76 fcntl: No available locks (errno = 79) So it is a lockd issue. I don't run a lockd. (Debian, mutt 1.0pre3-1.2 - newer one

Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-16 Thread Joshua Rodman
* Dan Lipofsky ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [991116 21:53]: > I am using mutt-1.0pre3us on Red Hat 6.1 Linux. When ever I try to > save a message to a file on a network file system I get > fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37) > If the file does not exist it successfully creates it b

Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-16 Thread Bill Nottingham
Dan Lipofsky ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said: > I am using mutt-1.0pre3us on Red Hat 6.1 Linux. When ever I try to > save a message to a file on a network file system I get > fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37) Is lockd running? What sort of NFS server are you trying to save to? Bill

Re: fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-16 Thread Lalo Martins
On Tue, Nov 16, 1999 at 03:52:11PM -0600, Dan Lipofsky wrote: > I am using mutt-1.0pre3us on Red Hat 6.1 Linux. When ever I try to > save a message to a file on a network file system I get > fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37) d

fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37)

1999-11-16 Thread Dan Lipofsky
I am using mutt-1.0pre3us on Red Hat 6.1 Linux. When ever I try to save a message to a file on a network file system I get fcntl: No locks available (errno = 37) If the file does not exist it successfully creates it but leaves it length zero. If I try to save to a file on the local file