[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: MAIL_USE_FLOCK and Debian.
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: MAIL_USE_FLOCK and Debian. |
Date: |
Fri, 21 Feb 2003 16:44:39 -0500 |
Given the discussion so far, it seems like we could:
- provide a run-time choice between the flock/lockf and maillock
approaches on systems that support both, along with a
configure-time choice between the liblockfile and libmail
implementations of maillock when relevant.
- provide a run-time choice between flock/lockf, maillock via
libmail, and the liblockfile algorithm. With this approach, we
wouldn't use liblockfile itself (because its maillock would
conflict with libmail's), just the code. Though direct use of the
code definitely has potential maintenance issues, at least as far
as Debian policy is concerned, I believe that just implementing
the algorithm is acceptable. Of course, if we did use the code
directly, we'd need copyright assignments.
- build-time choice only -- similar to what we have now, but perhaps
with an added --with-mail-locking=FOO which would require a
specific approach.
The second is a real pain. Do you really want to go to that much
trouble? If not, our choices are the first and the last.
Would you like to do the first one?
- Re: MAIL_USE_FLOCK and Debian., (continued)
- Re: MAIL_USE_FLOCK and Debian., Rob Browning, 2003/02/18
- Re: MAIL_USE_FLOCK and Debian., Richard Stallman, 2003/02/18
- Re: MAIL_USE_FLOCK and Debian., Rob Browning, 2003/02/18
- Re: MAIL_USE_FLOCK and Debian., Richard Stallman, 2003/02/19
- Re: MAIL_USE_FLOCK and Debian., Rob Browning, 2003/02/19
- Re: MAIL_USE_FLOCK and Debian., David Masterson, 2003/02/19
- Re: MAIL_USE_FLOCK and Debian., Richard Stallman, 2003/02/20
- Re: MAIL_USE_FLOCK and Debian., Rob Browning, 2003/02/20
- Re: MAIL_USE_FLOCK and Debian.,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: MAIL_USE_FLOCK and Debian., Rob Browning, 2003/02/23
- Re: MAIL_USE_FLOCK and Debian., Michael Sperber [Mr. Preprocessor], 2003/02/28