[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: ediff-buffers doesn't work on windows XP

From: Weiqing Huang
Subject: RE: ediff-buffers doesn't work on windows XP
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2002 09:52:59 -0800 (PST)

what i did on XP was: 
open a new emacs
find-file 2 files "trash" "test.java" (they have nothing in common)
M-x ediff-buffers, then accept the 2 defaults, which are: test.java and
trash respectively. 

the emacs window is now split into 2, showing the 2 files correctly.
but there is no diff. in the new pop-up ediff window, it shows _/0. if
i expand the window by typing "?", the mode line shows: 
*ediff control panel* At start of 0 diffs 
pressing "!" to re-calculate shows the same thing.

the messages buffer shows history like this:

Computing differences between test.java and trash ...

Processing difference regions ... done

if i use ediff instead (by specifying the same file names), i will get
5 diffs and the message buffer shows history like this:

Reading file c:/t/test.java ... 
Reading file c:/t/trash ... 
Computing differences between test.java and trash ...

Buffer A: Processing difference region 0 of 5
Buffer B: Processing difference region 0 of 5
Processing difference regions ... done

-----Original Message-----
From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden 
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 9:21 AM
To: Eli Zaretskii
Cc: Weiqing Huang; address@hidden; address@hidden
Subject: Re: ediff-buffers doesn't work on windows XP 

>>>>> "EZ" == Eli Zaretskii <of Mon, 07 Jan 2002 10:31:29 +0200>

    >> I suspect that this is as simple as accepting wrong defaults.
    >> (The defaults might somehow be wrong under XP.)

    EZ> Why would the defaults be wrong on one particular version of
    EZ> Could you please tell what defaults did you have in mind, and
why did you 
    EZ> think they could be different on XP?  Perhaps I could think
about this 
    EZ> even without reproducing the original problem, if I only knew
where to 
    EZ> look.

I remember that in one or two cases in the past some common commands
other-buffer) would sometimes yield different results on ntemacs. This
is from my memory -- don't remember which commands had this problem.

I don't know where to start myself, because the bug report provides no
information at all. I was just guessing that he might have been
comparing a buffer with itself without noticing it. One way of doing it
is to accept defaults without reading the buffer names. (One might do
this if you've been often relying on the defaults offered by ediff and
they've always been right in the past).

Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]