Date: Sun, 22 Aug 1999 22:07:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> To: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> Cc: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, FreeBSD Hackers <hackers@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD Committers <cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Mandatory locking? Message-ID: <199908230207.WAA19218@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <19990823100654.B83273@freebie.lemis.com> References: <19990823095310.A83273@freebie.lemis.com> <199908230031.RAA00909@apollo.backplane.com> <19990823100654.B83273@freebie.lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<<On Mon, 23 Aug 1999 10:06:54 +0930, Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> said: > Correct. I suppose it's worth discussing what the default should be. > Should they get EAGAIN or block? Obviously you'd want a way of > specifying which, but there would have to be a default for > non-lock-aware programs. I think I'd go for blocking; it's less error > prone. I'd be strongly opposed to any sort of mandatory locking. The whole notion is unspeakably evil, although this is mitigated somewhat if it does not apply to processes with appropriate privilege. -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | O Siem / We are all family / O Siem / We're all the same wollman@lcs.mit.edu | O Siem / The fires of freedom Opinions not those of| Dance in the burning flame MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - Susan Aglukark and Chad Irschick To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199908230207.WAA19218>