apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Orton <jor...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: Proc mutex re-org
Date Tue, 15 Jun 2004 08:15:09 GMT
On Mon, Jun 14, 2004 at 08:02:41AM -0400, rbb@rkbloom.net wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> > How will fcntl() work with this?  flock() isn't on a bunch of platforms, so
> > fcntl() is probably the more portable solution.
> >
> > For fcntl(), we open it for exclusive read and then unlink it right away - how
> > do you plan on dealing with that?  -- justin

Good point.

> Read the patch and find out.   :-)  FCNTL is tested in the test program,
> and it _does_ work, but only as a fork() mutex.  flock was the one I
> chose, just because I needed one that would work as a proc_exec mutex,
> and fcntl doesn't.

So to be clear, the answer to Justin's question is that your patch
*doesn't* deal with this, and that APR_LOCK_PROC_CREATE_DEFAULT will be
ENOTIMPL on e.g. Solaris and HP-UX?


View raw message