From: Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 22:10:12 -0700
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 11:40:45AM -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
> No, because it is writable by the user in every kernel source tree I
> have ever seen, the change makes no sense.
You haven't tried a BitKeeper tree then. You have to explicitly get
write permission.
That doesn't make any sense to me.
Firstly, the *.c file should be newer than the template it is
generated from, so the rule which tries to write the file should
never run if your file timestamps are setup correctly. So get the
timestamps correct in your bitkeeper trees :)
Secondly, there is no reason the version control system should prevent
a file from being writable to the user who owns the file, especially
in a case like this.
In fact, this is one of the things that makes my balls hurt when I
download source tarballs from some places. I have to chmod +w the
files to edit them just to make hack test local changes that I don't
care if anyone ever sees ever again. At that point I'm fighting
whatever source control system those sources came from.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 30 2001 - 21:00:25 EST