According to Geoff Hutchison:
> At 3:59 PM -0800 11/23/00, Jost Diederichs wrote:
> >I got the code snapshot htdig-3.2.0b3-111900.tar.gz hoping it would compile
> >on RedHat 7 and it did. Thank you.
> 
> I have a RedHat 7 box on my desk at work--I don't have much time to 
> code on it, but I do make sure things compile.
> 
> >If I remove the test for "dup" in the following line, everything works:
> >         if (ref->DocState() == Reference_noindex || dup) {
> >and change it to
> >         if (ref->DocState() == Reference_noindex) {
> >I believe that the test for dup has only recently been added. I tried to
> >trace back towards the definition of "dup" but havn't found it so far.
> 
> I would guess "dup" derives from the md5 checksumming. It should be 
> set if the md5 hash of the current document matches one in the 
> database already. Toivo put in that code and I'd have to search 
> around a bit to see what the problem would be--I haven't seen a 
> problem in my tests.

Yes, this was added at the same time as all the md5 stuff that Toivo added
on Aug 30.  I believe the "dup" is a mistake.  There is no variable of
that name that I can find, so it's probably grabbing the address of the
dup() system call.  If Toivo's intent was to have duplicates processed
by that code, well, they'd never get that far, because there's a break
in the section "if (!sx.empty()) { ..."  so when there's a duplicate
document found, it jumps out of the switch() {...} clause.  Maybe his
intent was to make sure the words.Skip() gets done for duplicates, in
which case it should be done right before the "break;" where it decides
not to index duplicates.  Is Toivo still around to comment on this?

-- 
Gilles R. Detillieux              E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Spinal Cord Research Centre       WWW:    http://www.scrc.umanitoba.ca/~grdetil
Dept. Physiology, U. of Manitoba  Phone:  (204)789-3766
Winnipeg, MB  R3E 3J7  (Canada)   Fax:    (204)789-3930

------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the htdig3-dev mailing list, send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
You will receive a message to confirm this. 


Reply via email to