kfogel@collab.net wrote:
>Branko Čibej <brane@xbc.nu> writes:
>
>
>>No. In the first case, I'm arguing against using a hardcoded path. In
>>the second, I'm talking about putting the binary in a place where the
>>server can find it, which does _not_ imply using a hardcoded path.
>>
>>
>>
>>>Another objection, applying to Proposal 2 only, is:
>>>
>>> "It's difficult to install a live post-commit script automatically,
>>> such that the system will reliably run it."
>>>
>>>Uh, okay. I don't really know enough to evaluate this objection. I
>>>know we can do this portably on Unix -- just use "#!/bin/sh" and make
>>>sure the script is executable, and everything will be fine. I had
>>>thought that .BAT files were equally reliable on all Windows systems,
>>>but apparently that's not the case?
>>>
>>>
>>An installed batch file must use an absolute, hardcoded path. That's my
>>objection.
>>
>>
>
>Hmmm. A hook file can use paths relative to the $REPOS directory,
>since that's one of the hook parameters...
>
>
It's a lot harder to figure out a relative path from $REPOS to the
Subversion install dir in the hook (and squared that in Windows batch
files!) than it is for "svnadmin create" to say
cp `dirname $0`/svndeltify $REPOS/hooks
(or the C equivalent, of course).
--
Brane Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu> http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Nov 25 23:13:16 2003