subversion-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Reedick <Andrew.Reed...@cbeyond.net>
Subject RE: Switching
Date Fri, 23 Aug 2013 18:33:42 GMT


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Les Mikesell [mailto:lesmikesell@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?





Mime
View raw message