Re: rcsdiff bug?

[Aaron S. Hawley]

On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Felix Bucherer wrote:

> Hi
>
> When doing an rcsdiff, the program says there are differences, yet I cannot
> see any %]
> (output is at the end of this)
> Is this a known issue or can you tell me what I am doing wrong?
> Thanks in advance for your help
> Felix
>
> -----
>
> address@hidden /cygdrive/d/inbox/server/doc/misc
> $ rcsdiff -V
> RCS version 5.7

good.

> address@hidden /cygdrive/d/inbox/server/doc/misc
> $ uname -a
> CYGWIN_NT-5.0 felix 1.3.22(0.78/3/2) 2003-03-18 09:20 i686 unknown unknown
> Cygwin

alright, assuming GNU diffutils is installed and works.  you may want to
take this issue with the person(s) who delivered your binaries, notably
Cygwin.

> address@hidden /cygdrive/d/inbox/server/doc/misc
> $ rcsdiff -kkv -r1.1
> //felix/RCSROOT/Enabler/external/Linux/XMLParser/xerces-c1_7_0-linux7.2/incl
> ude/xercesc/dom/RCS/DO
> M.hpp,v
> /cygdrive/d/inbox/server/external/Linux/XMLParser/xerces-c1_7_0-linux7.2/inc
> lude/xercesc/dom/DOM.hpp
> ===================================================================
> RCS file:
> //felix/RCSROOT/Enabler/external/Linux/XMLParser/xerces-c1_7_0-linux7.2/incl
> ude/xercesc/dom/RCS/DOM.hpp,v
> retrieving revision 1.1
> diff -r1.1
> /cygdrive/d/inbox/server/external/Linux/XMLParser/xerces-c1_7_0-linux7.2/inc
> lude/xercesc/dom/DOM.hpp
> 62,64c62,64
> <  * $Log: DOM.hpp,v $
> <  * Revision 1.1  2003/03/25 16:41:59  pstegemann
> <  * *** empty log message ***
> ---
> >  * $Log: DOM.hpp,v $
> >  * Revision 1.1  2003/03/25 16:41:59  pstegemann
> >  * *** empty log message ***
> address@hidden /cygdrive/d/inbox/server/doc/misc
> $ rcsdiff -kkv -r1.1
> //felix/RCSROOT/Enabler/external/Linux/XMLParser/xerces-c1_7_0-linux7.2/incl
> ude/xercesc/dom/RCS/DO
> M.hpp,v
> /cygdrive/d/inbox/server/external/Linux/XMLParser/xerces-c1_7_0-linux7.2/inc
> lude/xercesc/dom/DOM.hpp | sed -e "
> s/ /_/g"
> ===================================================================
> RCS file:
> //felix/RCSROOT/Enabler/external/Linux/XMLParser/xerces-c1_7_0-linux7.2/incl
> ude/xercesc/dom/RCS/DOM.hpp,v
> retrieving revision 1.1
> diff -r1.1
> /cygdrive/d/inbox/server/external/Linux/XMLParser/xerces-c1_7_0-linux7.2/inc
> lude/xercesc/dom/DOM.hpp
> 62,64c62,64
> <__*_$Log:_DOM.hpp,v_$
> <__*_Revision_1.1__2003/03/25_16:41:59__pstegemann
> <__*_***_empty_log_message_***
> ---
> >__*_$Log:_DOM.hpp,v_$
> >__*_Revision_1.1__2003/03/25_16:41:59__pstegemann
> >__*_***_empty_log_message_***

alright.  usually good bug tests use things like 'foo' and 'bar' (you
don't need to consider conforming exactly to this paradigm), and try to
narrow down the problem.  and most important, bug reports should be
reproducable.  is this happening only with one file?