Michael Ludwig wrote:
Steve Loughran schrieb am 16.06.2009 um 16:47:55 (+0100):
Michael Ludwig wrote:
Okay, so you were talking about Java limitations in general, not Java
limitations within the context of an Ant extension?
exactly.
Thanks for clarifying.
What you're saying about permissions reminds me of my initial post to
this list after discovering that the <delete/> task on Windows will
recursively and unconditionally remove directories - even when
they're write-protected.
I suspect permissions in Windows are not what you think they are; that
write protect probably stops you adding stuff inside a directory, not
deleting it from above.
It doesn't stop me adding stuff inside it; it stops me removing the
directory.
You're partially right, though: I can recursively delete a directory
*containing* the write-protected directory, and it does not trigger a
prompt asking "rm: remove write-protected directory `xxx/yyy'?" as on
Linux. It simply and recursively removes the whole tree, never mind
about dispensable write-protection.
Ant, however, goes one step further: It will remove a write-protected
file, which will not work using Windows tools without force, and it will
even recursively remove a write-protected directory. That's not at all
intuitive, and I think you could argue it could be quite harmful.
There's nothing complex going on in there, it just runs through every
file in the list, starting at the bottom, and goes File.delete() on it;
after deleting every file in a directory, it does the directory. I don't
think its trying to be malicious.
If you want ant to honour write-protect options, you could probably
extend delete to do it with a new attribute. Add the relevant tests and
we'll put it in.
-steve
--
Steve Loughran http://www.1060.org/blogxter/publish/5
Author: Ant in Action http://antbook.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-h...@ant.apache.org
