> the event flags used are to[o] promiscuous and that this
> prevents other processes from reading.  Removing ACCESS, OPEN and
> CLOSE events appears to rectify the situation.

This means that a later call to inotify-add-watch that lacks IN_OPEN 
will disable an already-existing watch that specifies IN_OPEN, right? 
That doesn't sound right.

I reviewed the inotify.c patches made since March and spotted what 
appear to be some problems related to this. What do you think of the 
attached patches? The first patch doesn't change behavior; it merely 
makes the later patches easier to write. The second patch restores 
onlydir (it appears to have been removed by mistake). The third patch 
uses IN_MASK_ADD instead of a promiscuous mask.