On Feb 11, 3:21 pm, Bob Archer <bob.arc...@amsi.com> wrote: > > On Feb 11, 3:21 am, Thorsten Schöning <tschoen...@am-soft.de> > > wrote: > > > Guten Tag MonicaS, > > > am Donnerstag, 10. Februar 2011 um 17:33 schrieben Sie: > > > > > We are using an old > > > > version that we are going to upgrade as soon as we are > > confident that > > > > we understand the current configuration and setup. > > > > It should be possible to upgrade to a newer version even without > > > understanding, because unless you dump and load your > > repositories, the > > > old format and configuration is kept and should just work. You > > would > > > just loose benefits of newer FSFS-versions or stuff like that, > > but can > > > dump and load whenever you like. > > > It is good to know that. I'm going to try to do it as soon as the > > team > > is ready. > > > > > The authz file contains the following three lines. If I > > understood > > > > correctly, svnadmin will have rw permissions to the whole > > repository > > > > and the rest of the users will have read-only access. > > > > But all users are able to 'checkout' and 'submit' files. So > > what are > > > > these permissions really doing? > > > > [/] > > > > svnadmin = rw > > > > * = r > > > > Which users are in the group svadmin? If all, then all should be > > able > > > to commit etc. > > > only one user belong to the svnadmin group. > > Did you verify that subversion is actually configured to use the authz file? > Just because it exists doesn't mean it is being used. > > >
Well, I checked all the svnserve.conf files, sometimes the line with the authz file was commented and sometimes it was not. The problem is that I have a lot of snvserve.conf files; I checked each of then, some have more permissions for users or groups. The one with svnadmin only was what I did think was the repository but inside of it I found at least 3 more repositories and on them I found the svnserve.conf using the authz file, and the authz file open the permissions for users. > > > > > > I see the files svnserve.conf and authz on different > > subdirectories. > > > > Shouldn't these files be only in the main or initial folders of > > the > > > > repository? > > > > Per default those files should be in the conf-directory of the > > > repository, but the location of authz can be configured in > > > svnserve.conf. > > > > ### Uncomment the line below to use the default authorization > > file. > > > authz-db = authz > > > > vs. > > > > ### Uncomment the line below to use the default authorization > > file. > > > authz-db = ../../foo/bar/authz > > > OK, so only the repositories have the sub-directories db, conf, > > dav, > > format, hooks and locks. > > > If this is true, this installation looks like only one repository > > but > > I really have 506 repositories. I have repositories under > > repositories. > > That's not good. But are you sure about that. Where are you "seeing" 506 > repositories? Perhaps you just have 506 projects in a single repository. Well, I looked for all the folder with the subfolders conf, db,dav,format, hooks and locks and I found 506. Some of them are empty, for example I have the following: Eng-Tech/conf /dav /db /format /hooks /locks /README.txt ABC-SDKs/conf /dav /db /format /hooks /locks /README.txt J-SDKs/conf /dav /db /format /hooks /locks /README.txt If I'm understating correctly, the above directory structure have 3 repositories, one called Eng-Tech, another called ABC-SDKs and another called J-SDKs. If I check with tortoiseSVN or with SVN list to Eng-Tech I get the following: ABC-SDKs J-SDKs If I check with tortoiseSVN or with SVN list to ABC-SDK I get the following: A-SDKs B-SDKs C-SDKs This means that A thru C SDKs folder belong to the repository ABC-SDKs and J-SDKs belongs to the J-SDKs repository; and Eng-Tech is empty. This is why I'm or was confused. I wanted to understand why we have so many repositories. I noticed that some of the repositories are hard links to other file-systems. Maybe this was done because of the disk space... I don't know. Please let me know if my understanding is not correct. Thank you. Monica > > BOb