On Wed, 25 Jul 2012, Peter Wang <novalazy@gmail.com> wrote: > Atomically move the new message file from the Maildir 'tmp' directory > to 'new'. > --- > notmuch-insert.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/notmuch-insert.c b/notmuch-insert.c > index 340f7e4..bab1fed 100644 > --- a/notmuch-insert.c > +++ b/notmuch-insert.c > @@ -75,6 +75,20 @@ maildir_open_tmp (void *ctx, const char *dir, char **tmppath, char **newpath) > } > > static notmuch_bool_t > +maildir_move_to_new (const char *tmppath, const char *newpath) > +{ > + /* We follow the Dovecot recommendation to simply use rename() > + * instead of link() and unlink(). > + */ > + if (rename (tmppath, newpath) == 0) { > + return TRUE; > + } Do we want to overwrite an existing message with this name? As far as I can see rename does overwrite and link would not: was that why rename is better than link/unlink? I would prefer not to overwrite but maybe there is a reason we need to. Would a possible alternative be to loop when finding a tmp file until both the tmp file and the new file do not exist? Best wishes Mark > + > + fprintf (stderr, "Error: rename() failed: %s\n", strerror (errno)); > + return FALSE; > +} > + > +static notmuch_bool_t > copy_fd_data (int fdin, int fdout) > { > char buf[4096]; > @@ -132,6 +146,10 @@ insert_message (void *ctx, notmuch_database_t *notmuch, int fdin, > > close (fdout); > > + if (ret) { > + ret = maildir_move_to_new (tmppath, newpath); > + } > + > if (!ret) { > unlink (tmppath); > } > -- > 1.7.4.4 > > _______________________________________________ > notmuch mailing list > notmuch@notmuchmail.org > http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch