From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#49261: 28.0.50; File Locking Breaks Presumptuous Toolchains Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2021 15:58:21 +0300 Message-ID: <83o8bmkx76.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87o8bn7bie.fsf@gnus.org> <83k0mbmqkh.fsf@gnu.org> <87tulf30ou.fsf@gnus.org> <87bl7m2thg.fsf@gnus.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="12513"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: ncaprisunfan@gmail.com, 49261@debbugs.gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 01 14:59:09 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lywHd-00034Q-2g for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2021 14:59:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42258 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lywHc-00075p-0z for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2021 08:59:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:39622) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lywHW-00075h-Id for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2021 08:59:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:48351) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lywHW-0006Hf-9h for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2021 08:59:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lywHW-0006ws-6q for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2021 08:59:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2021 12:59:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 49261 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 49261-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B49261.162514431326673 (code B ref 49261); Thu, 01 Jul 2021 12:59:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 49261) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Jul 2021 12:58:33 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59897 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lywH3-0006w9-7m for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2021 08:58:33 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:41754) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lywH1-0006vu-SE for 49261@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2021 08:58:32 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:49794) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lywGw-00061S-GJ; Thu, 01 Jul 2021 08:58:26 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:3025 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lywGw-0000mh-3a; Thu, 01 Jul 2021 08:58:26 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87bl7m2thg.fsf@gnus.org> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Thu, 01 Jul 2021 12:55:55 +0200) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:209269 Archived-At: > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2021 12:55:55 +0200 > Cc: 49261@debbugs.gnu.org > > Mallchad Skeghyeph writes: > > > ...even if the lock files are symlinks (which they not necessarily > > are), we need to handle the case of several files with identical > > basenames in different directories. (Their being symlinks is > > unimportant, because the target of the symlink doesn't exist.) > > > > Actually, is there even a good reason to keep relying on symlinks in the future? > > Considering that.. ahem, some Operating Systems cannot do symlinks for the > > user? > > If it were treated as a normal file you could load it up with whatever metadata > > you want. > > Using a normal file should also work, I think? But it'd be slightly > less efficient on some common popular file systems. We already use regular files on systems on which symlinks are either unsupported or otherwise problematic.