> Nothing you say here is wrong, but I thought it would make sense to *some* folks> to describe one part a bit more closely (with the idea that this is gonna be> bait for would-be coders via Google). I'm not criticizing here, please note that.>> First, there are a group of different forms that diff can be coaxed into> producing. They all do actually work, but some forms are easier for humans to> read, and more obvious to catch errors in, than others forms, so a convention> has been formed for a lot of projects (certainly, this includes FreeBSD and KDE)> to require that all diff runs to use the "unified" form. Among other> parameters, just include -u to diff (as opposed to -c for context type, or even> the default kind which is the "edit" form. Both the "edit" and "context" diff> outputs will get you yelled at (even though they work), and if you run them on> purpose (just so you can view the outputs yourself) I think the reason that> folks want you to use the unified diff will be obvious to you (as a human,> supposedly...).>> The 2nd point which I think might be confusing is the order that you give the> files to diff on the command line in. One is called the original, the other is> our changed data. If you're not using a system like KDE, or FreeBSD, or> anything that wraps your diffs for you so you are more likely to get it correct,> then you need to worry a bit more about file order, because you're going to be> giving the diff command directly. First, you want to have a copy of the form> of the file you're going to be changing, before any mods go into it. My habit> is to copy the original of any file I'm intending to modify to a file of the> same name, but with a suffix of ".orig" Well, the the point I'm going to make> is, that the order that you give the files to diff is very important. In KDE,> where svn is handling your diff calls for you, you can ignore this point, but if> other systems, the trick to remember is, to always give the file original form> to the diff first, and after that, the modified file. You mustn't get the order> incorrect, because if you do, "patch" is going to ask you if your patch might be> reversed. So, if you get that response from "patch", remember you always give> the original file first, THEN the modified file. The output is what patch has> been created to read, directly.
Thank you. Even if I do not need to worry about it now, properlyunderstanding the diff utility and the expected conventions in ageneral sense will certainly help in the future. Thanks!
-- Dotan Cohen
http://what-is-what.comhttp://gibberish.co.il___________________________________________________This message is from the kde mailing list.Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
