Re: svn commit: r19451 - trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline

["Peter N. Lundblad" <pe...@famlundblad.se>]

rooneg@tigris.org writes:
 > Author: rooneg
 > Date: Tue Apr 25 10:19:03 2006
 > New Revision: 19451
 > 
 > Modified: trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/authz_tests.py
 > URL: http://svn.collab.net/viewvc/svn/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/authz_tests.py?pathrev=19451&r1=19450&r2=19451
 > ==============================================================================
 > --- trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/authz_tests.py	(original)
 > +++ trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/authz_tests.py	Tue Apr 25 10:19:03 2006
 > @@ -39,8 +39,8 @@
 >    fp.close()
 >  
 >  def skip_test_when_no_authz_available():
 > -  "skip this test on local repository"
 > -  if svntest.main.test_area_url.startswith('file://'):
 > +  "skip this test when authz is not available"
 > +  if not svntest.main.test_area_url.startswith('svn://'):
 >      raise svntest.Skip
 >      

Doesn't they work with tunneled svn protocol?

//Peter

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

Re: svn commit: r19451 - trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline

[Alan Barrett <ap...@cequrux.com>]

On Wed, 26 Apr 2006, John Peacock wrote:
> Alan Barrett wrote:
> > I don't understand this comment.  In what sense does a user of
> > tunneled svn need write access to the repository files?
>
> In the sense that svn+ssh:// is exactly the same as file://, in terms
> of requiring write access to the repository files.[1]

All of svn+*://, svn:// and http[s]:// requires write access for the
user used by the web server or svnserve on the server side, but do not
require write access for the user on the client side.

file:// has the same user on both the client (working copy) and server
(repository) side, and requires write access for that user.  This is
very different from the others.

> 1. Yes, you can run svn+ssh:// using a single shared user (via the
> command= parameter of the authorized_keys file under .ssh), but this
> still requires the user actually accessing the repository to have
> write access.

Yes, the user on the server side needs write access.  That's the same
for any access method.  The interesting thing is how much access the
user on the client side has, and svn+ssh allows the client user to be
given no access at all except through the mediation of svnserve.
If svnserve uses authz for plain svn:// access, it would be very
surprising for it not to do so for svn+ssh:// access.

--apb (Alan Barrett)

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

Re: svn commit: r19451 - trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline

[John Peacock <jp...@rowman.com>]

Alan Barrett wrote:
> I don't understand this comment.  In what sense does a user of tunneled
> svn need write access to the repository files?

In the sense that svn+ssh:// is exactly the same as file://, in terms of
requiring write access to the repository files.[1]

John

1. Yes, you can run svn+ssh:// using a single shared user (via the command=
parameter of the authorized_keys file under .ssh), but this still requires the
user actually accessing the repository to have write access.

-- 
John Peacock
Director of Information Research and Technology
Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group
4720 Boston Way
Lanham, MD 20706
301-459-3366 x.5010
fax 301-429-5747

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

Re: svn commit: r19451 - trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline

[Alan Barrett <ap...@cequrux.com>]

On Tue, 25 Apr 2006, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> Does authz work at all over tunnelled svn?  I thought that was one of
> those cases where we didn't bother because you needed write access to
> the repos files anyway...

I don't understand this comment.  In what sense does a user of tunneled
svn need write access to the repository files?

--apb (Alan Barrett)

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

Re: svn commit: r19451 - trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline

[Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>]

On 4/25/06, Peter N. Lundblad <pe...@famlundblad.se> wrote:
> rooneg@tigris.org writes:
>  > Author: rooneg
>  > Date: Tue Apr 25 10:19:03 2006
>  > New Revision: 19451
>  >
>  > Modified: trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/authz_tests.py
>  > URL: http://svn.collab.net/viewvc/svn/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/authz_tests.py?pathrev=19451&r1=19450&r2=19451
>  > ==============================================================================
>  > --- trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/authz_tests.py    (original)
>  > +++ trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/authz_tests.py    Tue Apr 25 10:19:03 2006
>  > @@ -39,8 +39,8 @@
>  >    fp.close()
>  >
>  >  def skip_test_when_no_authz_available():
>  > -  "skip this test on local repository"
>  > -  if svntest.main.test_area_url.startswith('file://'):
>  > +  "skip this test when authz is not available"
>  > +  if not svntest.main.test_area_url.startswith('svn://'):
>  >      raise svntest.Skip
>  >
>
> Doesn't they work with tunneled svn protocol?

Does authz work at all over tunnelled svn?  I thought that was one of
those cases where we didn't bother because you needed write access to
the repos files anyway...

-garrett

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