Larry Jones wrote:
Derek Robert Price writes:Hrm. `-s' would seem to be roughly equivalent to diff's `--brief', so you mean `-t' to generate a patch between the last two revisions is useful? I suppose we'd be removing rdiff's default implication of `diff -uN', but that could be replaced with the addition of a `--patch' option to `cvs diff' as a shortcut for `-uN'.
Also, do you know of any issues where rdiff behavior intentionally differs from that of diff? I fixed diff some time ago to generate proper patches, so it seems to me that any behavior differences should perhaps be merged as much as possible in the vein of tag & rtag. If you don't know the answer off of the top of your head, don't worry about it, of course. I should get around to reading the source later.Not off the top of my head, other than the significantly different
command line parsing. I think merging patch.c into diff.c and unifying
as much code as possible would be a very good thing. I have mixed
feelings about unifying the command lines. On the one hand, it would be
handy to have a real rdiff that accepts all the diff options, but there
are conflicts with the existing patch (aka rdiff) options which are
themselves quite useful.
Derek
--
*8^)
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Get CVS support at <http://ximbiot.com>!
--
Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself.
Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others?
- Thomas Jefferson
_______________________________________________
Bug-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-cvs
