Erik Huelsmann wrote:
>>>>I've always wondered why we don't use the platforms null device for this.
>>>>We have SVN_NULL_DEVICE_NAME which we use to provide an stdin file for
>>>>hook scripts already. May it cause problems for external diffs when it is
>>>>not a regular file?
>>>I have *no* idea. I thought I had seen something like a null device
>>>define, but went looking for it in APR (why isn't it in APR?!)
>>>We'd have to try. On unix, I can't imagine it not working, but have no
>>>idea on other platforms... (I'd sure like to try though!)
>>We've been through this before; search the archives. The short answer
>>is: NUL: on Windows is equivalent to /dev/null on Unix; both are bit
>>buckets for writing and empty files for reading.
>>What I can't find in the archives, and can't remember a reason for, is
>>why we used .svn/empty-file despite having earlier confirmed the above.
>I wasn't referring to using NUL: for the empty file internally. I
>don't expect problems there, but should we expect external diff
>programs to work with it?
>I'd like to just call external diffs not working with NUL: broken,
>though, but should we try to move this change into 1.4RC1 and just
>see? I'm all for it.
Hm, yes, an external diff could have problems. I'd also call it broken,
though -- Cygwin's GNU diff can handle NULL. Unix programs should have
no problems at all, because for all they care, /dev/null is just another
(If someone on Windows uses a diff tool that can't handle a NUL: as a
file name, they can write a wrapper for it. I don't think we should
cater to every half-ported utility in the world.)
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Sat Nov 5 16:23:53 2005