Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!coplex!dean
From: dean@coplex.uucp (Dean Brooks)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.elm
Subject: Will ELM ever use lockf()?
Message-ID: <1991Mar25.193741.12360@coplex.uucp>
Date: 25 Mar 91 19:37:41 GMT
Organization: Copper Electronics, Inc.
Lines: 33

Hello,

   We have been running ELM for several years now, and are currently
at the most recent patchlevel (2.3 PL11).  However, we are having
some serious locking problems with elm.

   We are running, what is in my opinion, a very standard SYSV-3.2
system using Smail3.1.19 as our transport agent.  Eberything has
been configured correctly in ELM and Smail, but there are some
REAL discrepencies on how to do mailbox locking.

   Elm wants to use "flock()" or ".lock" files.  Smail wants to
use "flock()", "lockf()" or its own weird type of lock files.

   Now, we do not have "flock()" on our system (and many other V3.2
systems).  Since smail doesn't recognize elm's locking, and vice
versa, I have a REAL nasty problem.

   If elm were to support "lockf()" all my problems would be gone.  Are
there any hopes in the future of this being included in the elm source?

				Losing mail left and right,
					Dean Brooks

P.S.  If anyone has placed a hack for this in elm, please sendt me a
	copy if you would; I am desparate, and dont feel like hacking
	on elm much...

--
dean@coplex.UUCP   Dean A. Brooks
                   Copper Electronics, Inc.
                   Louisville, Ky
UUCP: !uunet!coplex!dean