On 11/15/05, Branko Čibej <email@example.com> wrote:
> Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> >>> All tests pass with no-op svn_wc__prep_file_for_replacement and
> >>> changed svn_io_file_rename. What do you think about this?
> >> Please don't even consider ripping that code out before you're 100% sure
> >> it's not needed (any more). I certainly didn't make those changes for
> >> fun. They were needed at the time.
> > Oh, I know. I wasn't talking about ripping *all* af it, just the part
> > where it retains the read-only bit on the destination.
> > If I consider that:
> > - svn:needs-lock was developed on *nix (linux, probably)
> > - in *nix it's possible to overwrite a read-only file
> > - unix retains the attributes on the file being renamed
> > - on Windows a file cannot be renamed if it or its rename-target is read-only
> > - svn_io_file_rename should behave the same on all platforms
> > I think that the change should not be ripped out, but has a bug: If it
> > were to remove the readonly bit on both files and put back
> > read-onlyness *of the source* it behaves the same on both *nix and
> > windows (instead of the current situation where it does the same
> > thing, but uses the target atts).
> Yes, I suspect that's a bug. However, I can't for the life of me
> remember my reasoning at the time. Oh, well.
The great thing is that if we consider that part a bug (which we do
now), we can remove the windows specific code from
Heh. Well, I'll work with zhakov to make sure it's fixed and still passes tests.
Thanks for your time,
Received on Tue Nov 15 20:16:07 2005