On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 10:36 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 02:48:50PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Ar Iau, 2006-08-17 am 09:23 -0400, ysgrifennodd Lennart Sorensen:
> > > Why can't O_EXCL mean that the kernel prevents anyone else from issuing
> > > ioctl's to the device? One would think that is the meaning of exlusive.
> >
> > If you were designing a new OS from scratch you might want to explore
> > that semantic as a design idea. I wouldn't recommend it because a lot of
> > apps will be upset if they issue an ioctl and it mysteriously fails or
> > hangs.
>
> I think hal should get an error when it tries to open the cdrom device
> when the burning application is using it.
this is what O_EXCL is for ;)
> Hmm, so how does one tell hal to go to hell and leave the cdrom device
> alone at all times (other than totally disabling hal).
make sure hal uses O_EXCL, and if not, beat up the hal guys about it ;)
--
if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
