On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 09:00 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * John McCutchan:
>
> > On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 08:50 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> What is the proper umask? It's different for different people. Can't
> >> you use the FSFS backend and set proper repository permissions so that
> >> t
* John McCutchan:
> On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 08:50 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> What is the proper umask? It's different for different people. Can't
>> you use the FSFS backend and set proper repository permissions so that
>> the umask doesn't matter?
>
> The proper umask is 002.
Even if adduse
On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 08:50 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> What is the proper umask? It's different for different people. Can't
> you use the FSFS backend and set proper repository permissions so that
> the umask doesn't matter?
The proper umask is 002. That might not work for EVERYONE, but for
* John McCutchan:
> This really needs to be done. It is a huge pain, and everytime the
> packages get updated, I have to re-fix this. Please convert all svn
> binaries to wrapper scripts that set the proper umask.
What is the proper umask? It's different for different people. Can't
you use the
Package: subversion
Version: 1.1.4-1
Followup-For: Bug #282468
This really needs to be done. It is a huge pain, and everytime the
packages get updated, I have to re-fix this. Please convert all svn
binaries to wrapper scripts that set the proper umask.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
5 matches
Mail list logo