X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:to:from:subject:date:message-id:references
	:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding
	:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=default; b=XN044lEZyuvg0tV+GKiyRMWTaFsYTy
	NHebwivNz5z4YmPuDdR6Nc1Y4urjW0qijQRV5wuWLaIYrpetf7xIWzr1o9CAzBRb
	ARh9XdQaIkz/z/3dRynqEGG1CKekniwEs7lihj/T7sH4PoUROl8I8GoO/SERRZU9
	Bt1hhMsUpHAbQ=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:to:from:subject:date:message-id:references
	:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding
	:in-reply-to; s=default; bh=cp3jDAs5KFQtD+7oQ8sLxRbvepY=; b=vb7+
	Vqq1F1xMP1+81+0wEVh7wm2Knt1tECco9jZpv1J3YF2eAPH40SZgSzVO0AX8wubO
	Q3zSr5MzHolTsLy3/ifPcimCnlXk6pX82vB9E7Irdq3RMyQNF+piXM44bXretxCG
	81FTTiPHkWr7ZMLgCrdKmn7VZyIq/2gjG6Z/aG4=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe@cygwin.com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help@cygwin.com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM,FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,RDNS_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.1
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
From: jojelino <jojelino@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: sqlite defect
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 20:53:21 +0900
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <ksb9be$2ss$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <trinity-fdc5a0b5-6dcf-4fc0-9370-dd32a75fe928-1373654994500@3capp-gmx-bs47> <51E703FB.1010300@etr-usa.com> <trinity-1068d666-3dec-43c9-8453-39c7cae3a94c-1374102947415@3capp-gmx-bs33> <51E74AB4.7010508@etr-usa.com> <ks87ur$nle$1@ger.gmane.org> <20130718085953.GC9628@calimero.vinschen.de> <ksa6bs$ac9$1@ger.gmane.org> <20130719100329.GC20871@calimero.vinschen.de> <20130719100809.GD20871@calimero.vinschen.de> <ksb4cn$cp8$1@ger.gmane.org> <20130719113009.GE20871@calimero.vinschen.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.2; rv:25.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/25.0a1
In-Reply-To: <20130719113009.GE20871@calimero.vinschen.de>

On 2013-07-19 PM 8:30, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> A valid testcase would help a lot, though.  What you meant to do
> was calling flock with LOCK_EX|LOCK_NB.
>
that's what exactly sqlite3 that uses the mandatory-locking did. 
reproducing the behavior was i meant to do.
> And then again, your testcase works as designed.  Not by me, but by
> Microsoft.  You can't overwrite an existing lock, even if hold by the
> same file handle.  See http://cygwin.com/cygwin-api/std-notes.html
>
Yes. the testcase works without mandatory locking. so i hope next 
sqlite3 release doesn't use mandatory locking feature of cygwin. someone 
who have plenty of time to waste digging into sqlite3 source code would 
come with workaround to the problem.
>
> Corinna
>


-- 
Regards.


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

