Stefan Sperling wrote on Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 02:07:59 +0100:
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 03:41:48PM -0800, Blair Zajac wrote:
> > It doesn't look like it's multithreaded safe to set, but should it be?
>
> I am not sure.
>
> Note that this isn't changing the environment of the currently running
> p
s...@apache.org wrote on Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 01:02:08 -:
> +static const char *
> +SVNHooksEnv_cmd(cmd_parms *cmd, void *config, const char *arg1)
> +{
> + apr_array_header_t *var;
> +
> + var = svn_cstring_split(arg1, "=", TRUE, cmd->pool);
> + if (var && var->nelts == 2)
> +{
With th
Julian Foad writes:
> * Brings kwallet to the same behaviour as Gnome keyring.
I've realised there is another difference in the current behaviour. The
way auth works is that Subversion records whether a particular provider
was used to store a particular password. The KDE provider will only
p
Philip Martin wrote on Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 10:02:06 +:
> Julian Foad writes:
>
> > * Brings kwallet to the same behaviour as Gnome keyring.
>
> I've realised there is another difference in the current behaviour. The
> way auth works is that Subversion records whether a particular provide
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 11:07:39AM +0200, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> s...@apache.org wrote on Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 01:02:08 -:
> > +static const char *
> > +SVNHooksEnv_cmd(cmd_parms *cmd, void *config, const char *arg1)
> > +{
> > + apr_array_header_t *var;
> > +
> > + var = svn_cstring_split(ar
Daniel Shahaf writes:
> Philip Martin wrote on Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 10:02:06 +:
>> Julian Foad writes:
>>
>> > * Brings kwallet to the same behaviour as Gnome keyring.
>>
>> I've realised there is another difference in the current behaviour. The
>> way auth works is that Subversion reco
Philip Martin wrote on Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 10:38:49 +:
> Daniel Shahaf writes:
>
> > Philip Martin wrote on Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 10:02:06 +:
> >> Julian Foad writes:
> >>
> >> > * Brings kwallet to the same behaviour as Gnome keyring.
> >>
> >> I've realised there is another differe
Daniel Shahaf writes:
>> Subversion does send the top-level names of trees that are excluded.
>
> Mike patched mod_dav_svn recently not to do that. See for example
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/
> (which has an 'infrastructure' child that isn't disclosed)
That's only for some requests. I
Julian Foad wrote on Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 12:53:38 +:
> Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Create a role account on svn-qavm.apache.org and have it run
> > backport.pl once a day, at 4am UTC, _and commit the resulting
> > merges_.
>
> Sounds good to me. +1.
Done. Crontab errors go to stsp
Daniel Shahaf writes:
> *shrug*. All I'm saying is that it's done, and it's defensible.
> I don't want to get into an argument about which behaviour is more
> correct or more secure.
There are so many switches that interact it's hard to know what
constitutes correct behaviour.
Suppose I have a
Philip Martin wrote on Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 12:59:47 +:
> Daniel Shahaf writes:
>
> > *shrug*. All I'm saying is that it's done, and it's defensible.
> > I don't want to get into an argument about which behaviour is more
> > correct or more secure.
>
> There are so many switches that intera
Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Philip Martin wrote:
>> [...] Subversion records whether a particular provider
>> was used to store a particular password. The KDE provider will only
>> prompt to open the wallet when the auth data indicates that KDE was used
>> to store a particular password. The GNOME
Julian Foad writes:
> Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>
>> Philip Martin wrote:
>>> [...] Subversion records whether a particular provider
>>> was used to store a particular password. The KDE provider will only
>>> prompt to open the wallet when the auth data indicates that KDE was used
>>> to store a p
Hiroaki Nakamura wrote:
>>> It would be nice if we could normalize paths in the repository without
>>> having to perform a dump/reload cycle, but I don't know how that
>>> would work in FSFS.
>>
>> It won't. Changing the encoding increase the length (in bytes) of the
>> string (in the dire
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 7:26 AM, Hyrum K Wright
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Hyrum K Wright
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Hyrum K Wright
>> wrote:
>>> This mail is very non-committal, but from the looks of CHANGES and
>>> STATUS there are number of items which could po
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Hyrum K Wright
wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 7:26 AM, Hyrum K Wright
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Hyrum K Wright
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Hyrum K Wright
>>> wrote:
This mail is very non-committal, but from the looks of
Johan Corveleyn writes:
>> I'm hesitant to roll a release until the cause of this problem has
>> been located, and a potential course of action identified.
>
> There is also the recent backport (just yesterday) of r1207555 and
> r1207808 (adding mod_dontdothat to build.conf), which makes my Windo
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Johan Corveleyn [mailto:jcor...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: donderdag 2 februari 2012 14:36
>> To: Stephen Butler
>> Cc: dev@subversion.apache.org; rhuij...@apache.org; Stefan Sperling; C.
>> Michael Pilato
>> S
Can't they also use the kde library directly?
Is it our problem?
Bert Huijben (Cell phone)
From: Philip Martin
Sent: 3-2-2012 5:30
To: Julian Foad
Cc: Daniel Shahaf; dev@subversion.apache.org
Subject: Re: --non-interactive and keyrings
Julian Foad writes:
> Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>
>> Philip Mart
My scripts build both ways on the buildbots and don't fail, but I don't
see a problem with the fix.
Bert Huijben (Cell phone)
From: Paul Burba
Sent: 3-2-2012 9:01
To: Bert Huijben
Cc: Johan Corveleyn; dev@subversion.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r1239695 - in /subversion/branches/1.7.x: ./
S
Philip Martin writes:
> The KDE behaviour is a potential information leak. A random app can use
> the Subversion libraries to query a repo, if it can monitor whether
> such a query causes the KDE prompt to appear then it can determine
> whether or not the password for the repo is in the wallet.
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Philip Martin
wrote:
> Johan Corveleyn writes:
>
>>> I'm hesitant to roll a release until the cause of this problem has
>>> been located, and a potential course of action identified.
>>
>> There is also the recent backport (just yesterday) of r1207555 and
>> r12078
Philip Martin wrote on Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 17:43:53 +:
> Philip Martin writes:
>
> > The KDE behaviour is a potential information leak. A random app can use
> > the Subversion libraries to query a repo, if it can monitor whether
> > such a query causes the KDE prompt to appear then it can d
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Philip Martin
> wrote:
>> Johan Corveleyn writes:
>>
I'm hesitant to roll a release until the cause of this problem has
been located, and a potential course of action identified.
>>>
>>> There is a
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Bert Huijben wrote:
> My scripts build both ways on the buildbots and don't fail, but I don't
> see a problem with the fix.
>
> Bert Huijben (Cell phone)
> From: Paul Burba
> Sent: 3-2-2012 9:01
> To: Bert Huijben
> Cc: Johan Corveleyn; dev@subversion.apache.org
> S
Hyrum,
Per our discussion, I updated what I could, but not everything (and I
ran no shims tests). Since I completely disabled the calls to
set_props() and set_text(), I know the shims are broken. I don't think
the changes to fix that part will be too hard.
It also looks like I broke some calls to
No problem. I'll take a look at it over the weekend.
-Hyrum
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> Hyrum,
>
> Per our discussion, I updated what I could, but not everything (and I
> ran no shims tests). Since I completely disabled the calls to
> set_props() and set_text(), I know t
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Bert Huijben wrote:
>> My scripts build both ways on the buildbots and don't fail, but I don't
>> see a problem with the fix.
>>
>> Bert Huijben (Cell phone)
>> From: Paul Burba
>> Sent: 3-2-2012 9:01
>> To:
Hello, I was just curious. I am developing a script that involves both a
pre-commit hook and a post commit hook.
The post-commit hook opens a file, reads a file, and saves a file. I was
wondering, do I need to set up a lock-file system to ensure that 2 people
committing at the same time will not c
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 02:42:49PM -0800, Cory Finger wrote:
> Hello, I was just curious. I am developing a script that involves both
> a pre-commit hook and a post commit hook.
>
> The post-commit hook opens a file, reads a file, and saves a file. I
> was wondering, do I need to set up a lock-file
Is there a way in subversion to disable the ability of the post-commit hook
to run concurrently?
Say Jim and Bob both commit a file at nearly the same time, I would like to
disable the asynchronous capabilities of commit hooks so that
Jim's commit hooks process, then Bob's commit hooks process.
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 04:11:56PM -0800, Cory Finger wrote:
> Is there a way in subversion to disable the ability of the post-commit
> hook to run concurrently?
>
> Say Jim and Bob both commit a file at nearly the same time, I would
> like to disable the asynchronous capabilities of commit hooks s
On 04.02.2012 01:11, Cory Finger wrote:
> Is there a way in subversion to disable the ability of the post-commit hook
> to run concurrently?
>
> Say Jim and Bob both commit a file at nearly the same time, I would like to
> disable the asynchronous capabilities of commit hooks so that
>
> Jim's comm
33 matches
Mail list logo
