On Monday 11 April 2005 01:55, Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2005, Josh Pieper wrote:
> > John Szakmeister wrote:
> > > On Sunday 10 April 2005 18:21, Philip Martin wrote:
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > > Should cat_local_file follow svn:special symbolic links?
> > >
> > > I suppose it should. I have a patch attached with all of the
> > > fixes, including support for resolving the symbolic link. However,
> > > I'm not sure
>
> ...
>
> > I am not sure that we want 'svn cat' to resolve symlinks at all. In
> > other user-visible output related to the special files (diff), the
> > contents of the repository-normal special file are used as is. This
> > has the advantage that it works in the face of symlinks pointing to
> > directories, broken symlinks, and platforms that don't support them
> > at all. Is there a clear consensus to actually resolve the symlinks
> > when cat'ing?
>
> No. What happens when you svn cat -rX, where is not base or working? If
> it is a link to something in the repository, one might expect it to use
> te same revision. I think it is better to leave this alone. I see this
> change as an optimization, not a semantic change.
I'll revise the patch and commit then.
-John
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Apr 11 11:37:13 2005