[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Nmh-workers] Locking. Horrible, horrible, locking ...

From: Lyndon Nerenberg
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] Locking. Horrible, horrible, locking ...
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2013 18:40:50 -0700

On 2013-06-30, at 6:33 PM, Ken Hornstein <address@hidden> wrote:

> But ... why?  I mean, seriously.  That means that people who use
> system-provided nmh packages lose.  I always thought compile-time
> configuration was something that was to be avoided.  What exactly is
> your beef with making it runtime configurable?

Code complexity.

> And how come you're bringing this up NOW, instead of when we hashed
> this all out in March?

Because I hadn't run across the current Solaris 11 behaviour.  Which would have 
pushed the point a lot harder.  I didn't like it back then, but I didn't have a 
definitive example of where it would break things.  Now I do.

The AFS locking issues make the case for the data file locking being 
configurable.  I still think the mbox locking should be nailed at compile time.

Regardless, the mbox locking needs to be completely divorced from the rest of 
the nmh locking.  There is too much ambiguity in the code to believe that we 
are doing either side of it correctly.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]