> > > This seems to cover most cases, so the locker_t object did not allow to > > overload its behaviour besides, providing the behaviour with the flags > at > > creation locker_create(..., flags); > > > > I'm curious, what scenario did we not cover, with all the flags define > in > > locker.h? > > > > The issue is that I want to use a combination of methods for locking > (dotlock WITH kernel fcntl). This need comes from the fact that the > various programs that access the mailboxes (imap server, pop server) > lock with different ways, so we want the mda to lock with all possible > ways when delivering to mailboxes. >
An interesting point, I guess it would be nice to do multiple locking in general. It is probably not possible to now when the mailbox is on a distributed file system, doing the kernel locking __and__ the dot-locking could be a good thing. Changing the code in locker.c to allow this may be an option i.e. it is no longer exclusive. > >From what Sergey told me in a previous thread you have to use 2 locker > objects and handle the one 'by hand' (see > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-mailutils/2005-07/msg00008.html) > > I can do this in my mda where I handle delivery to the user's INBOX, > but I cannot do it in the sieve fileinto action, unless I tamper with > the fileinto action code (which is something I do not want). > > Any suggestions are highly welcome. > You could temper with the options of sieve asking for a specific/multiple lock types when it opens the mailbox or save the file in a different folder: I also vaguely remember extensions to RFC3028 for sieve asking for a new flags extension for "fileinto" action. We could specify the implementation dependent flag ... not sure if it is a good idea. _______________________________________________ Bug-mailutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-mailutils
