[scponly] Anyone ever look at the darcs-compat patch?

[Dan Knapp]

Hm, I didn't think of that.  I have to admit that's reasonable.

Hypothetically, what if I were able to have it verify that there
aren't any hooks that will be run?  I'm not immediately sure how I'd
do that; but if you're at least tentatively open to the possibility, I
can look into it.  I think it might be as simple as making sure the
--no-posthook option is present (adding it if it's not), although
potentially it could also involve looking at the defaults... the
latter sounds kind of fragile and would be better to avoid, of course.

Either way, thanks for your time.

On 7/12/07, Kaleb Pederson <kibab at icehouse.net> wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> I finally had a chance to look at your darcs-compat patch.  I can't accept it
> because darcs provides a number of different ways that users can run
> programs.
>
> For example:
>
> `darcs put --help` lists off:
>
> --posthook=COMMAND   specify command to run after this darcs command.
>
> A more comprehensive list is:
>
> --diff-command=COMMAND
> --external-merge=COMMAND
> --posthook=COMMAND
> --sendmail-command=COMMAND
>
> To further complicate matters you can specify the command to run in the
> configuration file.  For example:
>
> _darcs/prefs/defaults:
>
> apply posthook find . -user "$USER" -a ! -perm +g+w -exec chmod g+w '{}' ';'
>
> Thus, even if we were able to process the command line arguments, there are
> other ways that the user would be able to execute commands.
>
> Thank you for your efforts.
>
> --Kaleb
>
>
> On Thursday 21 June 2007, Kaleb Pederson wrote:
> > Hi Dan,
> >
> > I'm working on a few bug fixes (one of which just went into CVS), and then
> > I plan on looking at the new features, including this one.  I really
> > haven't forgotten :).
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > --Kaleb
> >
> > On Thursday 21 June 2007, Dan Knapp wrote:
> > > It's been a couple weeks now since people said they'd take a look at
> > > my darcs-compat patch when they had the chance, and I haven't heard
> > > back.  Has anybody done that yet?  I understand that you're
> > > essentially volunteers (and thanks!), so there's no obligation, but I
> > > just thought I'd send a note so it doesn't get lost in the shuffle.
>
>
>
>


-- 
Dan Knapp