[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: rdiff

From: Derek Robert Price
Subject: Re: rdiff
Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 12:58:23 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030208 Netscape/7.02

Paul Edwards wrote:

"Larry Jones" <lawrence.jones@eds.com> wrote in message 
Is it possible to get rdiff to do a simple diff, the same way
that "diff" does by default, rather than a context diff?  I've
never found a way to do that.
No, it's not.  Rdiff is intended for making patches and is thus much
less flexible than regular diff.

Ok.  But the other thing rdiff is used for is for people who
want to see the differences between two releases, without
actually having to check out the entire release into a working
directory (which they may not even have space for).

The other advantage rdiff has is that if two releases have
different version numbers, but that is just a historical anomaly,
there are no actual code changes, rdiff will not report any
difference, while diff will show an "empty" change (which
is usually of no interest to anyone).

Anyway, thanks for letting me know.

BFN.  Paul.

Parallel operation would suggest that rdiff would behave mostly like diff in the same way that rlog, rannotate, and rtag behave mostly like their local counterparts. Since I fixed `cvs diff' to prepare proper patches some time ago, provided `-uN' is supplied, perhaps rdiff should accept all the diff options but default to `-uN' now?

I've never verified the empty change behavior, but perhaps diff shouldn't be displaying empty changes either.

Regardless, I don't have time to do all this myself.  :)

Patches gratefully accepted!  Test cases and new issues welcome as well.



Email: derek@ximbiot.com

Get CVS support at <http://ximbiot.com>!
Life in a vacuum sucks.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]