On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 10:57 +0100, Svante Signell wrote: > On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 10:38 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > > But again, I'm still unsure why you believe that locks are being > > > > inherited through fork(): before introducing a fork hook to forcibly > > > > unlock something, one needs to be absolutely sure that it's actually > > > > locked. Actually it'd even look like a design flaw if two process could > > > > actually hold a lock on the same piece of a file... Well, the file record locking patches were mainly written by Neal. So if you are so very expert on everything, maybe you could help me find where the design flaw is. I have not managed to find it so far. The patches have been submitted twice, latest (git mail) version starts with: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-hurd/2015-01/msg00108.html and http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-hurd/2015-01/msg00106.html
