Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!pacbell!pbhyf!rob
From: rob@PacBell.COM (Rob Bernardo)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.elm
Subject: Re: mailbox lock on 4.3 BSD-tahoe
Message-ID: <6542@pbhyf.PacBell.COM>
Date: 8 Dec 89 15:45:34 GMT
References: <200600002@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu>
Reply-To: rob@PacBell.COM (Rob Bernardo)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Lines: 16

In article <200600002@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu> paul@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu writes:
+Problem: I don't wish to run ELM either setuid or setgid as it's not needed
+for mail box locking.  4.3 BSD-tahoe uses only flock().  Creation of .lock
+files should be #ifdef'ed the same as LOCK_WITH_FLOCK.  A patch file will
+be sent to the contact address once I finish the install and test for a
+while.

The problem is that Configure cannot accurately tell if you system actually
*relies* on locking by flock(), only that your system *might use* flock().
Consequently, if ELM uses flock() it can't be sure that your system
doesn't need locking with .lock files.
-- 
Rob Bernardo      ...![backbone]!pacbell!pbhyf!rob -or- rob@pbhyf.PacBell.COM
  Product engineer, UNIX/C Reusable Code Library        Editor, "Go `C' UNIX"
  Office: (415) 823-2417                Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, California
  Residence: (415) 827-4301                     R BAR JB, Concord, California