OS X tests status update
John Arbash Meinel
john at arbash-meinel.com
Tue Aug 26 15:14:54 BST 2008
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Vincent Ladeuil wrote:
>>>>>> "Guillermo" == Guillermo Gonzalez <guillo.gonzo at gmail.com> writes:
> >> And *I* am using a case-sensitive HFS+ and they fail too. I
> >> suspect the 'preserving-case' HFS property (even if it shouldn't
> >> show up for me, weird).
> Guillermo> indeed..
> Guillermo> after a little google search, I learned that by default HFS+ is
> Guillermo> case-preserving AND case-insensitive.
> case-preserving implies case-insensitive
Not really, Linux is case-preserving as well. It never changes the case of my
files. The only system I've known to be case-insensitive because it was
non-case preserving was the old dos days. When you *had* to name your files
FOO.TXT because it only supported capital letters.
> Guillermo> So, I wondering if we should to teach bazaar this
> Guillermo> special OS X/HFS+ behaviour or we can reuse some
> Guillermo> of the win32 fs magic?
> Reusing the win32 fs magic was the intent of
> Since the tests are currently failing, I think we should try
Yeah, Aaron already had written the code to detect case-insensitive with
basically a stat(.bzr/checkout/FoRmAT). If that succeeds, we know it is case
We probably just need to use the flag (as you've seen).
> Given that only a few devs fully understand the difference
> between case-preserving and case-insensitive (and even fewer
> *care*), I don't think anybody will *require* bzr to handle
> them. So treating HFS+ as case-insensitive sounds reasonable.
I strictly don't care to support a DOS filesystem that changes filenames from
"foo" => "FOO" on creation. Aside from that, I'm pretty sure all
case-insensitive FS's in play are case-preserving.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the bazaar