Branko Čibej <brane@xbc.nu> writes:
> Right. I think it's also time somebody (me :-) pointed out that umasks
> and permission bits are a Unix-ism, and what you're doing here does
> not map nicely to (for instance) the read-only bit on Windows
> filesystems. We need a more abstract interface that doesn't mix
> write-protection and file permissions. For example:
>
> apr_file_[get/set]_perms
> apr_file_ [get/set]_read_only
> apr_file_[get/set]_executable
>
> On Unix, all of these would all map to twiddling permission bits. On
> Windows, for instance, the first would touch the file's ACL, the
> second would touch it's read-only bit, and the third is a no-op. And
> Subversion doesn't need (and shouldn't use, IMO) the first at all.
Mmmmm. Excellent thinking. Kevin, how do you feel about doing it
this way?
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:51 2006