[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?
From: |
Robert Elz |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs? |
Date: |
Mon, 20 Oct 2008 19:47:06 +0700 |
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2008 16:03:59 -0500
From: address@hidden
Message-ID: <address@hidden>
| The enclosed patch does copy instead of link
That might be OK, but you really don't want to use creat() to
make the output file, that gives no locking protection at all,
not even poor protection.
Instead, use (assuming it is available)
open(curlock, O_WRONLY|O_CREAT|O_TRUNC|O_EXCL, (int) st1.st_mode & 0777)
That should fail if the output file exists, which is almost as good as
the link version.
| Can anyone tell me what's going on (how to excerise the code) on line
| 720 of uip/whatnowsbr.c?
If I have that right, that's what adds the "Replied" (etc) "header" to
messages after you have sent a reply (the annotation).
So, to make it happen, you need the -annotate -noinplace options to repl
(or dist or forw) (and there's a chance it might be -annotate -inplace
that causes that link() call). Then after you have edited and sent the
message, the annotation should be added, causing that link() to stick
the file back after it has been updated.
kre
- [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, rader, 2008/10/18
- Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, Jerry Peek, 2008/10/18
- Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, rader, 2008/10/18
- Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, rader, 2008/10/18
- Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, Peter Maydell, 2008/10/18
- Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, rader, 2008/10/19
- Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, Jerry Peek, 2008/10/19
- Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, rader, 2008/10/19
- Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?, rader, 2008/10/20
- Re: [Nmh-workers] nmh over sshfs?,
Robert Elz <=