ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ken Wood <kw...@i2.com>
Subject Re: [PATCH] copy with overwrite
Date Tue, 13 Feb 2001 14:18:18 GMT
I agree. The last thing I want is a build too
that thinks it knows more than I do, and replaces
files that I've gone to the trouble of protecting.

If there are read only files that need to be dealt
with, I believe the right way is for the appropriate
files to be dealt with (chmod or whatever) by a script
that runs PRIOR to invoking Ant.

Glenn McAllister wrote:
> 
> Conor MacNeill wrote:
> 
> > Don,
> >
> > Currently, overwrite means to overwrite the file even if the destination
> > file is newer, not to overwrite it at all costs. I am a little wary about
> > overwriting read-only files. How do other people feel about this?
> 
> I'm a big -1 on this.  Usually you don't mark a file read-only unless you have
> a good reason to; arbirarily overwriting it by getting around the OS file
> protection mechanism is *not* a good idea.
> 
> >
> >
> > Conor
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Don Ferguson" <don@bea.com>
> > To: <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 11:41 AM
> > Subject: [PATCH] copy with overwrite
> >
> > > Under NT, attempts to copy over a read-only file raises a
> > > java.io.FileNotFoundException, even with the overwrite flag
> > > on.  This patch causes the file to first be deleted if overwrite
> > > is true, and if the destination file cannot be written.
> > >

Mime
View raw message