RE: Switching

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Les Mikesell [mailto:lesmikesell_at_gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 1:34 PM
> To: Edwin Castro
> Cc: Subversion
> Subject: Re: Switching
>
>
> I can't, off the top of my head, think of a scenario where it would be
> harmful to replace an unversioned directory with a versioned instance,
> leaving any unversioned local files that happen to be there alone.
> Other than maybe the chance that you'd accidentally commit them later,
> but that is no different than if you had put the local files in after
> the switch. Am I missing something? Is there a way to --force that
> without also potentially --force'ing files that conflict to be
> clobbered?
>

Dir permissions and ownership would change to that of the current user and umask and could create a security gap, but that probably falls under "if you're using --force, it's on your head".

How are symlinks handled by switch --force? It fails, or does it look at the target file/dir when deciding whether to replace it with a versioned object?

How are hardlinks handled by switch --force? Is the hardlinked file removed and replaced with a brand new file? Or does switch --force work directly on the hardlinked file thus updating all the "copies"?

On the windows side, would replacing a junction cause problems?
Received on 2013-08-23 20:35:20 CEST