RE: [boost] Re: [1.32 Release] Draft tarballs are available
From: Aleksey Gurtovoy [mailto:agurtovoy@meta-comm.com] Sent: November 1, 2004 10:04
No unix source package I ever downloaded had read-only files.
Could our long-time unix users confirm/negate this experience?
youp.
That gives no protection, really.
It prevents you from accidental editing/deletion.
As a machine's administrator I would explicitely set the permissions (and ownership, of course) of all files, anyways.
Completely unlike it, IMO. In the above situation, it's a CVS checkout, you are a developer, and editing is a normal workflow. Everything is exactly the opposite with the tarball.
I don't quite agree. The 'developer' role has meaning only in a given context. Read: It's not because I shouldn't modify code in the boost repository that I shouldn't be able to mess with my copy of a release tarball. Regards, Stefan
Stefan Seefeld wrote:
From: Aleksey Gurtovoy [mailto:agurtovoy@meta-comm.com] Sent: November 1, 2004 10:04
No unix source package I ever downloaded had read-only files.
Could our long-time unix users confirm/negate this experience?
No, it is not uncommon that source files are read-only - although I believe it is better if they are r/w. If they are r/o you have to go through extra steps to convince emacs to allow you to edit/save them.
Stefan Seefeld writes:
From: Aleksey Gurtovoy [mailto:agurtovoy@meta-comm.com] Sent: November 1, 2004 10:04
No unix source package I ever downloaded had read-only files.
Could our long-time unix users confirm/negate this experience?
youp.
Thanks! -- Aleksey Gurtovoy MetaCommunications Engineering
participants (2)
-
Aleksey Gurtovoy -
Neal D. Becker -
Stefan Seefeld