Re: [Gnu-arch-users] .listing files

[James Blackwell]

>     > From: Miles Bader <address@hidden>
>
>     > I can't see that it would cause any harm; it's just one small
>     > invisible file per directory in tree few people ever look at...
>

Tom Lord:
> On the contrary.  Anyone looking at the directory over http is looking
> at the file and depending upon its accuracy, which can not be
> transactionally guaranteed (hence `archive-fixup').

If we can't rely on automatically generated .listing files, then how can
we rely on them as they currently exist?  After all, the only difference
we're talking here is whether or not we're silently doing the equivilant
of using "-l" to make-archive? 

My understanding of .listing files is they're only relied upon as a
last-ditch effort because of http's brain-deadedness. For archives that
aren't being accessed via http, .listing files don't come into the
equation at all. 

The only argument I see that makes any sort of sense is that the user
accidentally places his archive in an http accessable place, and he's
dependant upon arch not being able to work with the archive. That's not
the argument you're making, is it? 

> Additionally, it complicates backups, security provisions and so
> forth.

I don't see how backups are affected, as this changes the default for
new archives, not for existing archives.

Regarding security provisions, please see the above.

> Actually, James:  for security reasons, the answer is no.  GNU Arch
> will not create .listing files by default.

Patience, please. We all need to decide that.

-- 
James Blackwell          Try something fun: For the next 24 hours, give
Smile more!              each person you meet a compliment!

GnuPG (ID 06357400) AAE4 8C76 58DA 5902 761D  247A 8A55 DA73 0635 7400