Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!oliveb!amdahl!pacbell!pbhyf!rob
From: rob@PacBell.COM (Rob Bernardo)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.elm
Subject: Re: Problem With Network Disconnects And Locks
Message-ID: <5114@pbhyf.PacBell.COM>
Date: 25 Apr 89 01:07:47 GMT
References: <5081@pbhyf.PacBell.COM> <2222@csd4.milw.wisc.edu>
Reply-To: rob@PacBell.COM (Rob Bernardo)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Lines: 21

In article <2222@csd4.milw.wisc.edu> jgd@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (John G 
Dobnick,EMS E380,4142295727,) points out that extraneous locking by 
.lock files is not so extraneous; it can have negative side effects on 
networked systems. 

+I vote with the BSD-ites who claim flock() is sufficient, and that the lock
+files can be dispensed with.  (Unless someone can convince me they really
+*are* required -- in addition to flock().)

It's not exactly a matter of *voting* :-). My understanding is that 
some older BSD systems use .lock files and some newer BSD systems use 
flock(). The problem is that Configure has no good way to tell which 
locking method is used.

Okay. Any one out there who has a BSD UNIX whose mailers used .lock files?
(I'm almost sure there were some right among the elm developers.)
-- 
Rob Bernardo, Pacific Bell UNIX/C Reusable Code Library
Email:     ...![backbone]!pacbell!pbhyf!rob   OR  rob@pbhyf.PacBell.COM
Office:    (415) 823-2417  Room 4E850O San Ramon Valley Administrative Center
Residence: (415) 827-4301  R Bar JB, Concord, California