28.9 ex Scripts Built by diff
The
-e
option of
diff
produces an editing script
usable with either
ex
(
33.4
)
or
ed
, instead of the usual output.
This script consists of a sequence of Obviously there is no need to completely re-create the first file from the second, because you could do that easily with cp . However, by editing the script produced by diff , you can come up with some desired combination of the two versions. It might take you a moment to think of a case in which you might have use for this feature. Consider this one: two people have unknowingly made edits to different copies of a file, and you need the two versions merged. (This can happen especially easily in a networked environment, in which people copy files between machines. Poor coordination can easily result in this kind of problem.) To make this situation concrete, let's take a look at two versions of the same paragraph, that we want to combine:
Version 1: The Book of Kells, now one of the treasures of the Trinity College Library in Dublin, was found in the ancient monastery at Ceannanus Mor, now called Kells. It is a beautifully illustrated manuscript of the Latin Gospels, and also contains notes on local history. It was written in the eighth century. The manuscript is generally regarded as the finest example of Celtic illumination. Version 2: The Book of Kells was found in the ancient monastery at Ceannanus Mor, now called Kells. It is a beautifully illustrated manuscript of the Latin Gospels, and also contains notes on local history. It is believed to have been written in the eighth century. The manuscript is generally regarded as the finest example of Celtic illumination. As you can see, there is one additional phrase in each of the two files. We can merge them into one file that incorporates both edits. Typing:
$ will yield the following output in the file exscript :
6c It is believed to have been written in the eighth century. . 1,2c The Book of Kells was found in the ancient . You'll notice that the script appears in reverse order, with the changes later in the file appearing first. This is essential whenever you're making changes based on line numbers; otherwise, changes made earlier in the file may change the numbering, rendering the later parts of the script ineffective. You'll also notice that, as mentioned, this script will simply recreate version2 , which is not what we want. We want the change to line 5, but not the change to lines 1 and 2. We want to edit the script so that it looks like this:
6c It is believed to have been written in the eighth century. . w
(Notice that we had to add the
$ to get the resulting merged file:
The Book of Kells, now one of the treasures of the Trinity College Library in Dublin, was found in the ancient monastery at Ceannanus Mor, now called Kells. It is a beautifully illustrated manuscript of the Latin Gospels, and also contains notes on local history. It is believed to have been written in the eighth century. The manuscript is generally regarded as the finest example of Celtic illumination. Using diff like this can get confusing, especially when there are many changes. It is easy to get the direction of changes confused or to make the wrong edits. Just remember to do the following:
Nonetheless, because there is so much room for error, it is better not
to have your script write the changes back directly into one of your
source files.
Instead of adding a If we use this command in the editing script, the command line to actually make the edits would look like this:
$ Writers often find themselves making extensive changes and then wishing they could go back and recover some part of an earlier version. Obviously, frequent backups will help. However, if backup storage space is at a premium, it is possible to save only some older version of a file and then keep incremental diff -e scripts to mark the differences between each successive version. (As it turns out, this is what version control systems like SCCS and RCS ( 20.12 ) do.) To apply multiple scripts to a single file, you can simply pipe them to ex rather than redirecting input:
But wait!
How do you get your
the results of the cat command will be sent, as usual, to standard output, and only the results of echo will be piped to ex . But if you type:
$ the output of the entire sequence will make it into the pipeline, which is what we want. - from UNIX Text Processing , Hayden Books, 1987, Chapter 12 |
|