openssh bugs - Jan 2018 - [Bug 2828] New: Extension for BSD style advisory file locking operations

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2828

            Bug ID: 2828
           Summary: Extension for BSD style advisory file locking
                    operations
           Product: Portable OpenSSH
           Version: 7.6p1
          Hardware: Other
                OS: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: enhancement
          Priority: P5
         Component: sftp-server
          Assignee: unassigned-bugs at mindrot.org
          Reporter: github at kalvdans.no-ip.org

Created attachment 3117
  --> https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/attachment.cgi?id=3117&action=edit
Suggested patch 1

sshfs does not currently support forwarding flock(2) operations to the
remote host.

This report is about implementing the necessary parts in the
sftp-server program. The sshfs side has its own pull request at
https://github.com/libfuse/sshfs/pull/55

The suggested patch is uploaded to

https://github.com/openssh/openssh-portable/pull/66

and also attached to this bug report.

The patch adds support for file locking operations LOCK_EX|LOCK_NB and
LOCK_SH|LOCK_NB to sftp-server. Allocate a new extension string for the
flock operations.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2828

github at kalvdans.no-ip.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |WONTFIX

--- Comment #1 from github at kalvdans.no-ip.org ---
Closing as WONTFIX, quoting Damien Miller from the pull request:

Sorry, but we have no desire to add file locking to sftp/sftp-server.
In fact, addition of file locking feature to the sftp protocol was why
we never implemented versions of the protocol after 3.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2828

Elvis Stansvik <elvstone at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |elvstone at gmail.com

--- Comment #2 from Elvis Stansvik <elvstone at gmail.com> ---
We're using these patches at work, running software on top of sshfs
which uses file locking, and they've been working great (we've battle
tested them quite a lot).

Is the decision to reject them 100% definitive? The patches look
non-intrusive to me, and bring very useful functionality. Carrying
patches is obviously not ideal, and we would be very happy if it they
could be reconsidered upstream.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2828

Damien Miller <djm at mindrot.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |CLOSED

--- Comment #3 from Damien Miller <djm at mindrot.org> ---
closing resolved bugs as of 8.6p1 release

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.