On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 03:34:42PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Francesco P. Lovergine: > > >> I intended to write the opposite: file locks are a per-process > >> resource in NPTL, so NPTL probably has the problems, and LinuxThreads > >> doesn't. > > > > A question: why using file locking instead of thread mutexes (which > > is the proper answer to syncronization issues in a thread-safe > > architecture)? > > SQLite databases (and Subversion repositories) are intended to be > opened concurrently by multiple processes. >
To be more clear: programs which use ordinary file locking to syncronize threads need to be fixed. That's not a problem of library version, that's POSIX. That was wrong also when it incidentally worked. A thread is not a process, that's all. -- Francesco P. Lovergine -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]