why doesn't the kernel enforce oplocks? (was: Re: [Samba] Re: How Samba let us down)

Simo Sorce simo.sorce at xsec.it
Thu Oct 24 20:32:00 GMT 2002

On Thu, 2002-10-24 at 20:48, Ben Johnson wrote:
> samba and vi aren't written to cooperate for example.  should these be
> written to cooperate?  that would mean the authors of each would have to
> cooperate.  it seems like it would be easier to have the kernel force
> cooperation.

By cooperation jra means they should use locks the right way.
And then the klernel forces cooperation.

I dunno if vi "cooperates", but samba surely can cooperate, as samba
respect locks.


Simo Sorce - simo.sorce at xsec.it
Xsec s.r.l.
via Durando 10 Ed. G - 20158 - Milano
tel. +39 02 2399 7130 - fax: +39 02 700 442 399
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20021024/30320392/attachment.bin

More information about the samba-technical mailing list