[Scottish] Re: slightly OT question

[Huard, Elise - D C&W Consultant]

That's a good idea - i'll look into that.

For preprocessing the branches : that was my first idea, but it would take
time (time is a problem).  And the second problem would be to convince the
none too trusting and computer semi-literate release management people, that
the intricate tool in question only does its cleaning and preprocessing job,
and doesn't eat or add any code, skewing the comparison.  So i'm first
looking at the 'binary' solution.  

Thanks !

Elise

> ----------
> From: 	Martin Habets[SMTP:habets_martin at yahoo.co.uk]
> Sent: 	03 December 2003 19:25
> To: 	scottish at mailman.lug.org.uk
> Subject: 	[Scottish] Re: slightly OT question
> 
> cmp might do the trick. I'd expect the timestamp to be in the header
> somewhere, so skipping the first 256 bytes should get around that.
> 
> Another route worth considering is to preprocess the branches and
> them compare those files.
> 
> Martin
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to win Live At Knebworth DVDs
> http://www.yahoo.co.uk/robbiewilliams
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Scottish mailing list
> Scottish at mailman.lug.org.uk
> http://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/scottish
> 
***********************************************************************************
This email and any accompanying files are confidential.      If you are
not  the  intended recipient  you  must not use,  copy or disclose the
content.   If you have received this email in error please contact the 
sender by return email and delete this message. 
Thankyou for your co-operation.
*************************************************************************************