[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Link with permissions (was: bitkeeper vs tla)

From: Jason McCarty
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Link with permissions (was: bitkeeper vs tla)
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 18:02:26 -0400
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.4i

Robin Farine wrote:
> On Friday 24 September 2004 20.43, John Meinel wrote:
> > What about this. Tla keeps the meta information about file
> > permissions separate from the files themselves. (I think right
> > now the way it checks if permissions have changed is to do a stat
> > on the revlib and the tree, and then see what the permission bits
> > are).
> It also traverses my mind from time to time. Instead of 
> systematically checking and recording permission changes, I 
> sometimes wonder whether Arch could provide a command that 
> explicitly records permissions from or applies permissions to a 
> tree.
> In fact, a completely independent command could handle this, Arch 
> would then treat the file that keeps track of the permissions (say 
> a mapping of inventory ids to permissions) just like any other 
> source file.

Should we even care about any permissions besides a file's executable
bit? At least it's the only permission I find myself changing in arch

Jason McCarty <address@hidden>

reply via email to

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