First of all, thanks to you and Ketil Malde for taking the time to look into this.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 02:54:54PM -0500, David Roundy wrote: > > What I want is for darcs to ignore that those are symbolic links, and > > to treat the file contents as if they were hard links or copies, at > > least as an optional behavior. This also seems to be the behavior of > > least surprise, and it is the way things used to be. > > What you describe involves deleting the symlinks. And this behavior has > not changed in a *long* time. Note that this behavior isn't particularly > unusual. You'll get the same effect if you try to edit a symlink using > emacs, for instance. Now I am completely confused: With emacs I never edit the symlink, but the pointed-to file. And in that case the symlink does not change and is not deleted; the symlink's target changes. Also, it seems that I was not successful in conveying that I do not want a symlink to be part of the repo, but that I want the content of the symlink's target to be in the repo. Now that I think about this a bit more, the semantics I would expect would be to - treat the symlink as if it were a copy of its target for reading operations (like `whatsnew`), and to - replace the symlink with a copy for writing operations (like `pull`). > Why are you including auto-generated symlinks in your repository? See my previous reply to Ketil Malde's mail. > Note that the behavior you are asking is quite different from what will > happen when darcs properly supports symlinks. I feared so much. > The semantics you describe could certainly be implemented, but I'd by > highly suspicious of supporting symlinks to directories. It's asking for > crazy things to happen, since it'd mean that darcs would then be willing to > write outside of a repository. In that case, why don't you also prohibit hard links? $ touch bar $ mkdir foo $ cd foo $ darcs ini $ touch a $ ln a b $ darcs add a $ ln ../bar c $ darcs add c $ darcs rec -a What is the patch name? ac Do you want to add a long comment? [yn]n Finished recording patch 'ac' If a patch modifying c is pulled into this repo, I would expect ../bar to change, too. As for my original question, I take the answer is that I have not overlooked an option in current darcs that would get me the desired semantics. Thanks again, Albert. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
