=?UTF-8?B?QnJhbmtvIMSMaWJlag==?= <brane@xbc.nu> writes:
> Blech. What you're saying is that we should never implement an internal
> diff/patch library, but should forever use a program that is simply not
> good enough for our needs.
>sigh<. Please don't read between the lines, because i'm not
saying anything in there. As i stated in an earlier message,
i'm describing what the *effect* should be. As a user, i'm not
concerned with how it's implemented and am sure the
implementation will be quite different from CVS's.
> >To prove this to yourself, just do a svn export of any two URLs
> >you are curious about and diff -r the two resulting directories.
> >
> That's a totally different case.
Eh? No it isn't. Or, rather, currently svn thinks it's a
totally different case, but my whole point is that it isn't.
But your next paragraph makes me think i don't understand what
you are saying.
> So now I'll hear a shout "but patch doesn't understand those diffs, so
> they're useless!" Quite the contrary -- it's patch that's "useless",
> because -- like diff -- it can't handle renames.
I have no idea what you're talking about. What do renames have
to do with anything? I'm not asking for magic; i know that
diff and patch don't handle things like that. There has been
talk of a new patch format, and new commands to generate and
apply these patches. Is that what you're talking about? That
topic is completely orthogonal to this thread.
--
Eric Gillespie <*> epg@pretzelnet.org
Build a fire for a man, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on
fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. -Terry Pratchett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Dec 8 23:18:53 2002