Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Mutt 1.4-1 opens mbox read only
From:	Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT syncretize DOT net>
To:	"Guy L. Oliver" <oliverg AT BATTELLE DOT ORG>
Cc:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
In-Reply-To:	<20020724132128.GA520@battelle.org>
References:	<20020724132128 DOT GA520 AT battelle DOT org>
Date:	24 Jul 2002 23:32:30 +1000
Message-Id:	<1027517551.10351.0.camel@lifelesswks>
Mime-Version:	1.0

On Wed, 2002-07-24 at 23:21, Guy L. Oliver wrote:
> Jens,
> 
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 10:20:49PM +0200, Jens Schuessler wrote:
> > > I've compiled Mutt now with --enable-dotlock=NO
> > 
> > IMO, the above is a bad idea because you are defeating one
> > of the standard ways to lock a file to prevent corruption if
> > there are multiple writers (e.g., mutt and procmail).
> 
> I ended up recompiling with out dotlock my self, because I
> found that regardless of permissions on the mail file and
> its directory ( I belive I tried all possible combos) I
> couldnt get things to work right with dotlock on.  My
> problem was different, but there you have it.  course, i'd
> love to be proven wrong. :-)

Guy, you *need* to provide Jason with the results of the test he asked
you to perform for him to prove you wrong. That or ship your PC to him.

Rob


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -