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

Re: Nasty double-replace copy-on-update bug

From: David Glasser <glasser_at_davidglasser.net>
Date: 2007-10-19 18:48:44 CEST

On 10/19/07, Philip Martin <philip@codematters.co.uk> wrote:
> "David Glasser" <glasser@davidglasser.net> writes:
> > On 10/19/07, Philip Martin <philip@codematters.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> Without a write lock some other Subversion process could change or
> >> delete the file in the interval between the decision to use a file and
> >> the moment it gets used.
> >
> > Huh. When is it ever safe to not take the write lock, then?
> When doing a read-only operation such as status.

OK, so what matters is the overall user-level (svn_wc-level?)
operation, not the particular purpose that the adm_access is being
grabbed for? (Because here, the baton is being grabbed just for
reading; a different, locked baton is used to write...)


David Glasser | glasser_at_davidglasser.net | http://www.davidglasser.net/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Oct 19 18:49:06 2007

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.