From: "Tim 'Zastai' Van Holder" Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp References: <200008241754 DOT MAA13001 AT darwin DOT sfbr DOT org> Subject: Re: cvs, rcs, and diff Lines: 32 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 18:19:12 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.224.92.242 X-Trace: afrodite.telenet-ops.be 967141152 213.224.92.242 (Thu, 24 Aug 2000 20:19:12 MET DST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 20:19:12 MET DST Organization: Pandora - Met vlotte tred op Internet To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com "Jeff Williams" wrote in message news:200008241754 DOT MAA13001 AT darwin DOT sfbr DOT org... > From INSTALL for cvs-1.10: > > Unlike previous versions of CVS, you do not need to install RCS > or GNU diff. > > Ok, I can understand that CVS might not want to require RCS, since CVS > itself is an alternative to RCS for version control. No it isn't an alternative, it's afront-end. > But why provide your own `diff'? Doesn't that go against the Unix > philosophy of having lots of basic utilities, each one doing its thing > extremely well, with close cooperation between programs? Maybe; but I think that since CVS is a rather critical application, they decided it would be best to integrate the things they used, so they did not have to complicate things by handling different versions of the tools, and to remain functional if one of the external programs is missing or broken. Not using external applications also reduces security issues, I suppose. If you want the correct answer, post your message again to gnu.cvs.help or gnu.cvs.bug; the CVS developers read those groups and will likely be able to provide a better insight into their decisions than I can :-) -- Hi, I'm a signature virus. plz set me as your signature and help me spread :)