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

Re: CVS update: subversion STACK

From: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_galois.collab.net>
Date: 2000-11-08 01:07:03 CET

As APR is our portability layer, probably the best thing would be to
provide an APR interface to driving external processes, with a
standard return code convention, and switch Subversion to use that.

Greg S, if Branko wrote such a thing, do you think it would be welcome
in APR?

(And notice how I subtly volunteered Branko to write it... :-) )

-K

Branko =?ISO-8859-2?Q?=C8ibej?= <brane@xbc.nu> writes:
> Karl Fogel wrote:
>
> > Is system() a security risk beyond this, and if so how should we drive external programs?
>
> We need anoter way. The system that MSVC gives us (me egocentric, yes
> :-) has completely different return codes than the POSIX one. That's why
> the client tests on Win32 were (are) failing.
>
> Would something like synchronous spawnlp, or fork + execlp if spawnlp
> isn't available, be O.K.? I volunteer to provide such for Unix and
> Win32. Pity that APR doean't have something like that, though ...
>
> --
> Brane �ibej
> home: <brane_at_xbc.nu> http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
> work: <branko.cibej_at_hermes.si> http://www.hermes-softlab.com/
> ACM: <brane_at_acm.org> http://www.acm.org/
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:14 2006

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.