changes in shared svn+ssh repos configuration with fsfs

[Faheem Mitha <fa...@email.unc.edu>]

Dear People,

I'm wondering if someone can briefly tell me what changes to expect in
usage of the new fsfs filesystem, with svn+ssh. Specifically, will any
of the items in "The svn+ssh:// server checklist" as listed at
http://svnbook.red-bean.com/svnbook/book.html#svn-ch-6-sect-5 become
unnecessary?

This one

"When BerkeleyDB creates new logfiles, they need to be owned by the
group as well, so make sure you run chmod g+s on the repository's db
directory."

at least, hopefully?

I used this checklist to set up a shared (BDB) repository. While it
worked fine, I felt somewhat queasy about directly manipulating a
repository in this fashion, and I'd feel far more comfortable if some
(if not all) of these configuration items could be done away with
eventually.

Please cc me on any reply, I'm not subscribed. Thanks.

                                                              Faheem.




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: changes in shared svn+ssh repos configuration with fsfs

[Faheem Mitha <fa...@email.unc.edu>]

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004, Greg Hudson wrote:

> > I'm wondering if someone can briefly tell me what changes to expect
> > in usage of the new fsfs filesystem, with svn+ssh. Specifically,
> > will any of the items in "The svn+ssh:// server checklist" as listed
> > at http://svnbook.red-bean.com/svnbook/book.html#svn-ch-6-sect-5
> > become unnecessary?
>
> In 1.1, both FSFS and BDB repositories will be created with the setgid
> bit set on the db directories, so that step will become unnecessary
> for any back end.  But depending on your primary gid and umask at the
> time when you create the repository, you may still need to set the
> group ownership and initial permissions appropriately.
>
> With FSFS, it will also be unnecessary to enforce a umask on svn
> processes, because FSFS automatically chmods all new rev and rev-prop
> files to match the previous ones.  (We would, of course, like the
> umask issue to go away in BDB as well, but that's waiting for a
> possible-far-off BDB enhancement.)
>
> > I used this checklist to set up a shared (BDB) repository. While it
> > worked fine, I felt somewhat queasy about directly manipulating a
> > repository in this fashion, and I'd feel far more comfortable if
> > some (if not all) of these configuration items could be done away
> > with eventually.
>
> We've talked about adding --user and/or --group options to the
> svnadmin create commands to avoid the need to cross the abstraction
> barrier during initial setup, but there's been no strong consensus on
> those one way or the other.

Thanks for the information. I (and I am sure lots of other people) eagerly
await subversion 1.1. :-)

                                                            Faheem.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: changes in shared svn+ssh repos configuration with fsfs

[Greg Hudson <gh...@MIT.EDU>]

> I'm wondering if someone can briefly tell me what changes to expect
> in usage of the new fsfs filesystem, with svn+ssh. Specifically,
> will any of the items in "The svn+ssh:// server checklist" as listed
> at http://svnbook.red-bean.com/svnbook/book.html#svn-ch-6-sect-5
> become unnecessary?

In 1.1, both FSFS and BDB repositories will be created with the setgid
bit set on the db directories, so that step will become unnecessary
for any back end.  But depending on your primary gid and umask at the
time when you create the repository, you may still need to set the
group ownership and initial permissions appropriately.

With FSFS, it will also be unnecessary to enforce a umask on svn
processes, because FSFS automatically chmods all new rev and rev-prop
files to match the previous ones.  (We would, of course, like the
umask issue to go away in BDB as well, but that's waiting for a
possible-far-off BDB enhancement.)

> I used this checklist to set up a shared (BDB) repository. While it
> worked fine, I felt somewhat queasy about directly manipulating a
> repository in this fashion, and I'd feel far more comfortable if
> some (if not all) of these configuration items could be done away
> with eventually.

We've talked about adding --user and/or --group options to the
svnadmin create commands to avoid the need to cross the abstraction
barrier during initial setup, but there's been no strong consensus on
those one way or the other.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org