Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Message-Id: <199905170642.XAA20055@shell4.ba.best.com>
Subject: Re: erroneous "are the same file" report
In-Reply-To: <9661a32a.2470da51@aol.com> from "N8TM@aol.com" at "May 16, 99 10:34:57 pm"
To: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 02:42:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: Glenn Spell <glenn AT gs DOT fay DOT nc DOT us>
Reply-To: glenn AT gs DOT fay DOT nc DOT us (Glenn Spell)
Organization: the aerie
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL38 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

N8TM AT aol DOT com wrote:

> Occasionally, I run into a situation where I try diff on 2 files
> which show up in ls -l as having different creation dates and
> different sizes, but diff reports no differences.  I just tried
> to copy one over the other using mv and it reports
>
> mv:  `file.1' and `file.2' are the same file
>
> They do have differences, if I display them using less.

Does 'cmp' report differences?

Does 'ls -i' report different inode numbers?

> (what's with the leading accent grave and trailing apostrophe?)

Yea, the leading "backquote" or "backtick" and trailing "single
quote"... these characters should only be used on a VDT in matched
pairs.  I think the *stupid* mix-matching is called "smart quotes".

> When diff does report differences, it shows frequent failures to
> scroll (over-writing the last line), this being much more frequent
> with this snapshot.

I've seen some terminal/cursor problems with the latest snapshots.

There seems to be no difference at all between the cygwin sources
(toplevel, config, etc, include, libiberty, newlib, and winsup),
except for winsup/.snapshot-date and winsup/doc/sites.texinfo, of
990303 and 990308. Yet, the precompiled dlls for these two snapshots
are two entirely different files. The 990308 dll is very buggy.

What happened regarding the way Cygnus compiles the dlls between
990303 and 990308.

The "here documents using 'ash'" problem disappeared between the
990321 and 990325 snapshots. However, from sometime in March to the
present, the terminal handling still seems problematic, at least for
executables compiled with the B20.1 tools.

Could this be related to the way Cygnus compiles the dlls or is it
more likely an incompatibility between the old and the new?

Or perhaps there are still known bugs concerning terminal handling.

-glenn

-- 
 )      Glenn Spell <glenn AT gs DOT fay DOT nc DOT us>      )   _       _____
 )   Fayetteville, North Carolina, C. S. A.   )_ (__\____o /_/_ |
 )  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  _  )   >-----._/_/__]>
 )- blue skies - happy trails - sweet dreams -)             `0  |

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com