Hi, Prompted by Vincent Lefevre's e-mail (below, see thread at [1]), I took at look at SVN-4622, or at least the second half of it.
TLDR; svn status is verifying read-only status for each file (based on svn:needs-lock). Under Windows there is a separate read-only flag so this is easily done and fixed. Under *nix the code will check for the normal permission bits, first on user (if current user is owner), then on group (if current user's group is the owner group) and finally on world. A file with 664 permissions not owned by the current user/group will be seen as read-only and the code will try to fix this (failing with Permissions denied but still reporting Reverted). The permissions code is in svn_io__is_finfo_read_only(). The code trying to "fix" the permissions is in revert_wc_data(). One way to solve this would be to add a separate argument to svn_io__is_finfo_read_only() signalling if the file is not owned by the current user (directly or via a group). This could then be picked up by revert_wc_data() to output a separate message "Incorrect permissions/ownership on XX" instead of the "Reverted". There are some additional uses of svn_io__is_finfo_read_onl() but they can easily fixed. As far as I understand, this function is a private function so it doesn't require a changed API. What do you think? Kind regards, Daniel [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/p1ky889bxwy8okqly7h1lgckxfpldnxs Den sön 24 dec. 2023 kl 01:35 skrev Vincent Lefevre <vincent-...@vinc17.net >: > On 2023-12-23 22:44:51 +0100, Daniel Sahlberg wrote: > > Thank you for your report and also for finding the root cause. I can > > confirm this is the same on my machine. I'd like to take a closer look > but > > I'm not quite sure when I will find the time. > > > > This has been reported before: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SVN-4622 > > Indeed. Not for the original bug report, but what is said in the > comments. > > I'm wondering why svn wants to change the permissions, at least if > there is nothing to revert for the concerned file. I would see this > as a (separate, but related) bug. FYI, in my working copies, I set > some files as read-only in order to make sure I won't modify them > by mistake (even though there would be no data loss with a revert, > except the timestamp). So I think that this is a bad behavior if > "svn revert" changes the write permission. > > -- > Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> > 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> > Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) >
