[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Do we want 'svn patch' to be able to add empty files?

From: Augie Fackler <durin42_at_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 19:44:13 -0500

On Sep 3, 2010, at 7:10 AM, Daniel N├Ąslund wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 12:18:37PM +0200, Branko ─îibej wrote:
>> On 02.09.2010 10:50, Branko ─îibej wrote:
>>> Hmm, this is interesting. :) Git faithfully (blindly?) interprets
>>> Unix
>>> permission bits, whiles SVN faithfully (blindly?) interprets the
>>> contents of special files ... I wonder if "svn patch" does the right
>>> thing here?
>>>
>>> Anyway, for the sake of interoperability, we'd have to emit and
>>> parse
>>> the git format for symlinks. Not that I'm too amused by the idea
>>> that
>>> git probably just does a chmod on the new file without thinking
>>> about
>>> it, but hey, All the World is Linux, right? :)
>>
>> Did some testing ... apparently "git apply" completely ignores the
>> permission bits "new file mode ..." line, at least I haven't been
>> able
>> to force it to do anything with them.
>
> From builtin/apply::try_create_file() in the git source code:
>
> fd = open(path, O_CREAT | O_EXCL | O_WRONLY, (mode & 0100) ? 0777 :
> 0666);
> if (fd < 0)
> return -1;
>
> Git only checks for the executable bit, AFAIK.

Correct, git and hg only store files as 0644 or 0755. Everything else
gets handled by the umask on the user's machine.

>
> Daniel
Received on 2010-09-04 06:21:04 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.