Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010716010021.00b66740@mail.online.no> X-Sender: hardon AT mail DOT online DOT no X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 01:10:59 +0200 To: Corinna Vinschen From: Gunnar Andre Dalsnes Subject: Re: Re: file locking (F_GETLK) porting workaround anyone??? In-Reply-To: <20010709102828.H8578@cygbert.vinschen.de> References: <3B4961EE AT epostleser DOT online DOT no> <3B4961EE AT epostleser DOT online DOT no> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 09.07.01 10:28, you wrote: >On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 09:56:20AM +0200, hardon wrote: >> Any known workaround for the unimplemented F_GETLK, file locking func??? >> Whats the big deal with this thing anyway?? >> If we don't need the lockers pid, just try std. lock and check for errors, >> right?? > >You're welcome to contribute F_GETLK and F_SETLK(W) in Cygwin if you've >found a way to implement them correctly. What's wrong with F_SETLK(W)? Missing signal interrupt support? If so, could consistent asynchronous file IO (on NT) fix this? LockFileEx do support asynchronous IO. Proper implementation of F_GETLK could be done (on NT) with use of a kernel mode filesystem filter driver. >Corinna > >-- >Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to >Cygwin Developer mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com >Red Hat, Inc. > >-- >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/ -- 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/