Re: [Bug-cssc] bug-CSSC post from address@hidden requires approval

[Joerg Schilling]

James Youngman <address@hidden> wrote:

> > The flag as mentioned above has been introduced in August 2008 and is in use
> > since then to enable those extensions that would cause compatibility 
> > problems
> > if the user is not aware of the feature in advance. This currently the 
> > keywords
> > %d% %e% %d% %h%
>
> I understand why a flag is needed.    But I was asking you to consider
> changing which flag letter enables these keywords so that it doesn't
> conflict with the 'x' flag letter in SCO OpenServer.

As mentioned before: it has been introduced in August 2008, so it seems to be 
too late.

> > > is binary.  The implementations lacking binary file support won't do
> > > this and can't extract a correct gotten body from the encoded history
> > > file, but it's fairly clear that the user is unlikely to want admin to
> > > fail in this case (but if they do, there's an environment variable
> > > they can set to get this
> > > compatible-with-poor-implementations-but-annoying behaviour).
> >
> > Do you know of such implementations?
>
> I believe Sun's SCCS implementation is the only one (besides CSSC)
> which supports binary files.   That's a shame, since the feature is
> very useful.

Did you ever test with an empty file as starter? BTW: HP-UX does niot support 
the 'e' flag at all.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:address@hidden (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       address@hidden                (uni)  
       address@hidden (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily