On Sun, 16 Sep 2007, Jan Hudec wrote:
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 08:14:11 +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> [2007.09.16.0014 +0200]:
While at it, you should invent a fallback what to do when the
owner is not present on the system you check out on. And
a fallback when checking out on a filesystem that does not support
owners.
Like rsync, git would use numerical UIDs (which are always present)
by default, but could be told to try to map account names.
If the filesystem does not support owners, chown() would not exist.
I actually tend to think of things the other way around: instead of
a fallback when chown() does not work (what would such a fallback be
other than not chown()ing?), it would only try chown() if such
functionality existed.
There's a problem. You need to know that the functionality is missing and not
try to read attributes back, but instead consider them unchanged. Nothing
that can't be taken care of, but it needs to be handled carefuly.
but this can be handled by a local config option. yes, you have to be
careful, but it'snot that hard.
David Lang
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
