Re: [Nmh-workers] dot locking broken?

[David Levine]

Marcin wrote:

> >> David Levine <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> Using setegid() is ok according to POSIX.1-2004, it was previously
> just a BSD extension.

Thanks.  Committed.  I also added a check for success of setegid(),
and adios() on failure.

> >> I was also wondering if we should give the user to abort waiting
> >> for a lock with ^C.
> >
> > I tried, and ^C works for me (on Linux).
>
> That's interesting, from what I see in the inc code SIGINT is
> trapped in inc.c, lines 513++ ?

And that code is conditional on trnflag.  I was testing with -file,
which didn't use it.  It looks like the signal handlers are there
to avoid corruption when the mailbox would be modified.  I think
they should be retained.

David