Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Some issues

[Sriram Ramkrishna]

On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 05:27:56PM -0400, Miles Bader wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 10:46:54AM -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
> > Where I work binary diffs is killer feature for us because of the large
> > binary files people check in (from the likes of Cadence and homebrew cad
> > tools) We would quickly fill up filesystems.
> > 
> > Thats why people are using Synchronicity and Bitkeeper..
> 
> What do "Synchronicity and Bitkeeper" do?

Synchronicity is a revision control system for design collaboration:
http://www.synchronicity.com/ and can in fact be directly interface with
synopsys tools.  If memory serves it's based on implementing revision
control over http.  It involves shared workspaces and what not.  I
don't have all the details since I don't work with it directly.

Bitkeeper of course is Arch's direct competitor.

> BTW, while binary deltas would be very nice for the `ordinary' case, they
> might be quite dangerous in some other cases -- I at least fairly often apply
> arch changesets outside the context of just replaying branches, and while the
> current behavior is not great, at least it results in consistent binary files!

If you're doing diffs against binary files you have to have good
history becuase you won't be able to put the binary file back
together again if any part is missing.

> I'm not saying it can't be done well, just that it's not quite a `trivial
> change' (in the context of arch or anything else).

Tom was saying that you can add binary diffs to patch and diff and if I recall 
it's actually in CVS head although I have no idea where I got that information 
from.

sri