Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 13 Apr 2011 16:23:01 +0300
From:      Nikos Vassiliadis <nvass@gmx.com>
To:        Bastien Semene <bsemene@cyanide-studio.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: lockf command
Message-ID:  <4DA5A3B5.4080302@gmx.com>
In-Reply-To: <4DA56819.90503@cyanide-studio.com>
References:  <4DA56819.90503@cyanide-studio.com>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On 4/13/2011 12:08 PM, Bastien Semene wrote:
> I wish that if command #2 can't acquire the lock, lockf exits (exit 0
> would be nice).
> If I set -t 1, lockf is quite what I'm waiting for. But I like to do
> this in a clear way : if it can't acquire the lock it exits, no timeout
> wait.
>
> Am I misunderstanding something ? What should I change ?
>

You should use -t0, something like:
> lab# lockf -t 0 /tmp/lock /bin/csh
> You have mail.
> lab# lockf -t 0 /tmp/lock /bin/csh
> lockf: /tmp/lock: already locked
> lab# echo $?
> 75
> lab#

HTH, Nikos



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4DA5A3B5.4080302>