[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Re: [arch-users] advanced usage advice: the pri

From: Pau Aliagas
Subject: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Re: [arch-users] advanced usage advice: the prism technique (fwd)
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 11:21:21 +0200 (CEST)

On Sun, 28 Sep 2003, Paul Hedderly wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 01:40:18PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > 
> > > about adding an argument to `tla get' so that it would hardlink instead
> > > of copying files from the revision library (if possible)? It escapes my
> > 
> > that would make it. Of course I'm playing risky, but I'm fine to deal
> > with that risk, the payoff makes it worthwhile, it's simply up to me
> > (not to the kernel since the kernel can't do that) to always do
> > copy-on-write on all the checked out trees.
> Would it be worth tla making the checked out files read-only. That way
> if you try to edit it you get a warning at least. You would need to do a
> "tla unlock ..." to edit it (which of course would rename and copy the
> file, maybe restore original permissions.)
> Just trying to think of ways to make this safer... :O)

If you change permissions in a tree, that is part of teh revision control, 
so I don't see it feasible.

What I see feasible is to, somehowm add an option to tla get to use 
hardlinks to library revisions or cached revisions, instead of massive 
copying. The library option sound easier as its exactly this.

I have even thought of creating library revisions as working dirs, then
copying the {arch} dir inside. If your editor and patch copy-on-write, 
immediate support for this special "tla get --hardlinks" would be almost 
done :)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]