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

Re: Apache or svnserve?

From: Ryan Schmidt <subversion-2005_at_ryandesign.com>
Date: 2005-11-28 10:24:52 CET

On Nov 28, 2005, at 10:00, Thorsten Schacht wrote:

>> If you want to use "authorization per directory",
>> you should use Apache.
> Well yes this is needed, but currently CVS folders are authorized
> through the common unix groups.
> This should be the same with svnserve as well.

Um.... no....

I don't know how CVS works, but in Subversion, there is no direct
correspondence between files/directories in the repository and files/
directories on the hark disk. Subversion stores everything on disk in
a kind of database. If you run apache httpd as your server, then
apache httpd needs full read/write access to all parts of that
database. If you use svnserve as your server, then svnserve needs
full read/write access to it. If you use svn+ssh, then it's a bit
more complicated.

If you want to restrict certain users to be able to read/write from/
to certain parts of a repository, then you need something called
authz, which is currently only available as an add-on to the apache
httpd server. As of Subversion 1.3.0, it will also be available for

As for how you define which users may access the repository (or
repositories), that varies by access method. If you use svnserve,
then you'll write a user file which contains usernames and passwords.
If you use apache httpd, you can use any authentication method
available in apache—htpasswd files, LDAP authentication, PAM....

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Nov 28 10:27:21 2005

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

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