Re: cvs 1.11.2 rdiff fails with binary files

[Derek Robert Price]

tony@enfusion-group.com wrote:

> Quoting Larry Jones <lawrence.jones@eds.com>:
>
>  
>
> > > What exactly is the point of the cvswrappers option during import
> > > (-W)... it doesn't seem to matter with rdiff.  Is this just an
> > >      
> > rdiff
> >    
> >
> > > quirk, or am I missing something?
> > >      
> > It marks the file as binary, which affects many things -- including
> > rdiff -- just not in the way you wanted.
> >    
>
> Ok, but now it does.  Here's a patch that works as follows:
>
> For each file in the module we are rdiff'ing: if the two versions differ, but the file is marked as 
> "binary" (via cvswrappers, or cvs admin -kb), then instead of trying to print the patch (which 
> would result in an error and non-zero return code), just print out a message like the "patch" 
> program does, ie:  "Binary files name:ver1 and name:ver2 differ".
>
> Here it is:
>  

Larry,

Do you have a good reason we shouldn't allow this, other than it isn't 
accompanied by appropriate test cases and maybe documentation?  It seems 
to me that there isn't any good reason for rdiff to fail this way.  It 
would seem to me to be best to match the diff behavior here.

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.

Tony,

Assuming Larry doesn't want to argue with me, could you resubmit this 
patch with a test case and maybe documentation, as per the HACKING file 
in the top level of the source distribution?

Thanks,

Derek

--
               *8^)

Email: derek@ximbiot.com

Get CVS support at <http://ximbiot.com>!
--
There are no absolutes.