Hi Daniel,
thank you for your reply.
> Are you aware of the svnauthz-validate utility? (Try 'make
> svnauthz-validate' in a Subversion source tree)
I am indeed aware of the validation utility,
but although the users have the chance to check their configuration
I am not sure if it is proper behavior to ignore a whole file instead
of a single misconfigured line.
Of course there might be some reason to do this I'm not aware of,
but I can't think of one yet :-)
creo
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:09:13 +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>
> Daniel creo Haslinger wrote on Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 01:49:21 +0100:
>> Hey there,
>>
>> I'm here to ask you if this the following is intended behaviour
>> and - if it really IS - if one should consider to think over it
>> again. I'm not sure if this should go to dev@, but I decided to
>> start at users@ first ;-)
>>
>> We're serving a medium sized Subversion userbase ( ~ 400 users ),
>> repositories are of course maintained by the users themselves and
>> of course they are managing access permissions on their own.
>>
>> Every now and then it happens that a user renders a repository
>> unusable by doing misconfiguration on their .control as e.g.:
>>
>>
>> [repo-x:/project-y]
>> johndoe = rw
>> janedoe = rw
>> r = *
>>
>>
>> Of course the last line is incorrect since it should have been
>> * = r instead of r = *.
>>
>> From our point of view, subversion should of course send a warning
>> to the logs that this line is erronous - and it actually does that,
>> but as soon as it trips over this line it discards the whole
>> .control and ignores it.
>>
>> There are often over 20 to 50 users on a repo that are relying
>> on the SVN and just by this simple mistake the whole repo goes down.
>>
>> It it _really_ necessary to discard a whole repo config instead of
>> discarding the corrupt line?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for any hint or advice,
>>
>>
>> creo
Received on 2011-02-20 21:37:11 CET