subversion-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bill Cebula <bill.ceb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: SVN access denied when comparing revisions
Date Fri, 22 Mar 2013 02:57:40 GMT
If that information ( Lack of explicit anon-access is interpreted as
anon-access=read) was in the svnserv.conf file, it would have saved me a few
hours of troubleshooting.

Thanks,

Bill

On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name>wrote:

> Bill Cebula wrote on Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 18:30:23 -0500:
> > Phillip,
> >
> > Thanks for the reply.  If the line anon-access = read is commented out,
> > can't that be interpreted as anon-access = none on startup of the server?
> >
>
> No, lack of explicit anon-access is interpreted as anon-access=read.
> (and that can't be changed for compatibility reasons)
>
> Daniel
>
> > It seems like a 1 line conditional statement is all that is needed to fix
> > this particular issue.  I realize it is related to a larger bug.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Philip Martin
> > <philip.martin@wandisco.com>wrote:
> >
> > > Bill Cebula <bill.cebula@gmail.com> writes:
> > >
> > > > I would expect the same behavior whether the* anon-access* line is
> > > > commented or whether it is specified as *none*.  However, if the
> > > > anon-access line is commented, you get the error even though you the*
> > > > authz* specifies read/write privileges for
> > > > the entire repository.
> > >
> > > This is a known bug.  The svn:// protocol chooses either anonymous or
> > > authenticated access right at the start of the connection and has no
> way
> > > to upgrade later.
> > >
> > > http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2712
> > >
> > > --
> > > Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads:
> > > http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/download
> > >
>

Mime
View raw message