On Sat, Dec 16, 2000 at 04:27:20PM -0600, Dan Nelson wrote:
> In the last episode (Dec 16), Axel Thimm said:
> > Wouldn't that mean, that you might cause data corruption if, say, I was to
> > read my mail from a FreeBSD box over an NFS mounted spool directory
> > (running under OSF1 in our case), and I decided to write back the mbox to
> > the spool dir the same moment new mail is delivered?
> That's why dotlocking is recommended for locking mail spools. Both procmail
> and mutt will dotlock your mail file while it's being accessed.
This was just a test case above. Not all programs are kind enough to allow
control of their locking strategy. What about samba accessing NFS volumes in a
transparent net or pure sendmail w/o procmail? Especially if your mail server
is already at heavy load serving O(1000) users, forcing each incomming mail to
be passed to procmail would must certainly increase the load too much. (Maybe
sendmail and samba can also be compiled with dotlocking methods, these are
also just examples). Also not all our users want to switch to mutt, we have
to support a wide range of mail readers.
Axel.
--
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
