lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bugzi...@apache.org
Subject DO NOT REPLY [Bug 28074] - [PATCH] npe if java.io.tmpdir does not exist
Date Tue, 18 May 2004 16:27:52 GMT
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28074>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28074

[PATCH] npe if java.io.tmpdir does not exist





------- Additional Comments From cutting@apache.org  2004-05-18 16:27 -------
I think if java.io.tmpdir is relative, then we should probably use something
relative to the PWD of the JVM.

If org.apache.lucene.lockdir is relative, then should it be relative to the PWD
or to the index directory?  For consistency with java.io.tmpdir, perhaps this
should also be relative to PWD.

But, when both are null, then the lock directory should be the index directory.
 Right now we're attempting to handle this case by using a relative pathname of
".", but perhaps we should handle it more explicitly.  Perhaps we should, when
LOCK_DIR is null, explicitly use the index directory as the lock dir.

Does that sound right?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message