From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by listman.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76AA1403E1 for ; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 04:14:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mail@localhost) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g958EVq15708 for blinux-list@listman.redhat.com; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 04:14:31 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [172.16.48.31]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g958EVf15704 for ; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 04:14:31 -0400 Received: from server1.shellworld.net (root@server1.shellworld.net [64.39.15.178]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g957tFX14015 for ; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 03:55:15 -0400 Received: from localhost (ldavis@localhost) by server1.shellworld.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g958EUO87902 for ; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 03:14:30 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ldavis@shellworld.net) Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 04:14:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Luke Davis To: blinux-list@redhat.com Subject: Re: pine and filters. In-Reply-To: <200210051603.52333.valhalla@computerdatasafe.com.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Loop: blinux-list@redhat.com Sender: blinux-list-admin@redhat.com Errors-To: blinux-list-admin@redhat.com X-BeenThere: blinux-list@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.1 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: blinux-list@redhat.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Linux for blind general discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: I believe I have seen pine following the ".lock" standard which procmail uses, and I believe it honors kernel locks, since sendmail has no problems writing to the mail box concurrantly with pine and procmail. I suggest you ask on: procmail@lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE (think it's a mailman list, so follow those subscription convensions) Luke On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, John wrote: > On Saturday 05 October 2002 15:55, Luke Davis wrote: > > I do that all of the time. Look into file locking (kernel and lockfiles), > > if you do not understand why it works without trouble. > > I understand those topics. The documentation I've not seen relates to what > locking conventions PINE follows. > > Kernel locks are not necessarily mandatory, and there have been particular > problems with locking on NFS mounts. > > > Needless to say, large numbers of people have procmail deliver to folders > > while pine is active constantly, and have no problems. > > True, I've not heard of problems, but the sceptic in me says that means "I've > not heard of problems," and not that "there are no problems." > > Same applies to other client software that uses mbox-style files. > > I used to use cucipop too, and had not heard of problems with it. Indeed, I > used it because my ISP (a large one by WA standards) did. I quit using it > when I found it was severely broken - it didn't lock the mailbox. > > > >