On Feb 11, 3:21 pm, Bob Archer <Bob.Arc..._at_amsi.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 11, 3:21 am, Thorsten Schöning <tschoen..._at_am-soft.de>
> > wrote:
> > > Guten Tag MonicaS,
> > > am Donnerstag, 10. Februar 2011 um 17:33 schrieben Sie:
>
> > > > We are using an old
> > > > version that we are going to upgrade as soon as we are
> > confident that
> > > > we understand the current configuration and setup.
>
> > > It should be possible to upgrade to a newer version even without
> > > understanding, because unless you dump and load your
> > repositories, the
> > > old format and configuration is kept and should just work. You
> > would
> > > just loose benefits of newer FSFS-versions or stuff like that,
> > but can
> > > dump and load whenever you like.
>
> > It is good to know that. I'm going to try to do it as soon as the
> > team
> > is ready.
>
> > > > The authz file contains the following three lines. If I
> > understood
> > > > correctly, svnadmin will have rw permissions to the whole
> > repository
> > > > and the rest of the users will have read-only access.
> > > > But all users are able to 'checkout' and 'submit' files. So
> > what are
> > > > these permissions really doing?
> > > > [/]
> > > > svnadmin = rw
> > > > * = r
>
> > > Which users are in the group svadmin? If all, then all should be
> > able
> > > to commit etc.
>
> > only one user belong to the svnadmin group.
>
> Did you verify that subversion is actually configured to use the authz file? Just because it exists doesn't mean it is being used.
>
>
>
Well, I checked all the svnserve.conf files, sometimes the line with
the authz file was commented and sometimes it was not.
The problem is that I have a lot of snvserve.conf files; I checked
each of then, some have more permissions for users or groups. The one
with svnadmin only was what I did think was the repository but inside
of it I found at least 3 more repositories and on them I found the
svnserve.conf using the authz file, and the authz file open the
permissions for users.
>
>
> > > > I see the files svnserve.conf and authz on different
> > subdirectories.
> > > > Shouldn't these files be only in the main or initial folders of
> > the
> > > > repository?
>
> > > Per default those files should be in the conf-directory of the
> > > repository, but the location of authz can be configured in
> > > svnserve.conf.
>
> > > ### Uncomment the line below to use the default authorization
> > file.
> > > authz-db = authz
>
> > > vs.
>
> > > ### Uncomment the line below to use the default authorization
> > file.
> > > authz-db = ../../foo/bar/authz
>
> > OK, so only the repositories have the sub-directories db, conf,
> > dav,
> > format, hooks and locks.
>
> > If this is true, this installation looks like only one repository
> > but
> > I really have 506 repositories. I have repositories under
> > repositories.
>
> That's not good. But are you sure about that. Where are you "seeing" 506 repositories? Perhaps you just have 506 projects in a single repository.
Well, I looked for all the folder with the subfolders conf,
db,dav,format, hooks and locks and I found 506.
Some of them are empty, for example I have the following:
Eng-Tech/conf
/dav
/db
/format
/hooks
/locks
/README.txt
ABC-SDKs/conf
/dav
/db
/format
/hooks
/locks
/README.txt
J-SDKs/conf
/dav
/db
/format
/hooks
/locks
/README.txt
If I'm understating correctly, the above directory structure have 3
repositories, one called Eng-Tech, another called ABC-SDKs and another
called J-SDKs.
If I check with tortoiseSVN or with SVN list to Eng-Tech I get the
following:
ABC-SDKs
J-SDKs
If I check with tortoiseSVN or with SVN list to ABC-SDK I get the
following:
A-SDKs
B-SDKs
C-SDKs
This means that A thru C SDKs folder belong to the repository ABC-SDKs
and J-SDKs belongs to the J-SDKs repository; and Eng-Tech is empty.
This is why I'm or was confused. I wanted to understand why we have so
many repositories. I noticed that some of the repositories are hard
links to other file-systems. Maybe this was done because of the disk
space... I don't know.
Please let me know if my understanding is not correct.
Thank you.
Monica
>
> BOb
Received on 2011-02-11 22:57:04 CET