On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:29:08 +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:41:30 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 01:16:20PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > > If not, it would be nice to have a workaround. I have one, which is a > > > simple CGI script which fetches the file using the svn command line > > > client and prints its contents: > > > > > > #!/bin/sh > > > echo "Content-type: text/plain" > > > echo > > > svn cat http://www.lm-sensors.org/svn/lm-sensors/trunk/prog/detect/sensors-detect > > > > > > I've tested it locally and it works fine for me. I could run it on my > > > home server, however I think it is better for the users if they get the > > > script from lm-sensors.org. They really have no reason to trust my > > > personal server (which may also disappear someday.) > > > > > > Axel, is there a chance we could run this CGI script on lm-sensors.org > > > and point users to it when we want them to test the latest version of > > > sensors-detect? > > > > I think I'd rather prefer a static solution, e.g. create a daily > > checkout w/ keyword substitution. Could be part of the snapshot > > creation script. > > It isn't uncommon that I commit a fix and ask a user to give it a try > right away. Having to wait for one day would be inconvenient in this > case. I can live with it if there's no other way (that's probably > better than the current situation) but I'd prefer a more frequent > update rate. > > Wouldn't it be possible to add an exception for sensors-detect to the > post-commit hook? If file == sensors-detect then run "svn cat > sensors-detect > some path" or something? That way we would ensure > there is no delay between the commit and the snapshot, and also no > daily checkout when the file doesn't change. > > > CGIs are nasty in the sense that for security one may turn it off on a whitelist > > basis (actually nothing uses CGI currenlty) and a simply CGI script > > could be forgotten in a server update/hardening messing up the > > download. > > This wouldn't be a critical CGI, so if it breaks, we can simply fix it > when we notice the breakage. But anyway, as the server admin it's up to > you. If you say no CGI then no CGI. Axel, any progress here? -- Jean Delvare
