Xref: utzoo comp.unix.aix:4603 comp.unix.misc:1314
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!romp!auschs!awdprime!sanders.austin.ibm.com!sanders
From: sanders@cactus.org (Tony Sanders)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix,comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: RCS compilation on RS-6000 --  problem
Message-ID: <6766@awdprime.UUCP>
Date: 17 Apr 91 19:49:15 GMT
References: <592@wjh12.harvard.edu>
Sender: news@awdprime.UUCP
Reply-To: Tony Sanders <sanders@cactus.org>
Followup-To: comp.unix.aix
Distribution: na
Organization: IBM AWD, Austin
Lines: 25
Originator: sanders@sanders.austin.ibm.com

In article <592@wjh12.harvard.edu> jnl@wjh12.UUCP (Joshua Lobel) writes:
>I'm trying to compile RCS on an IBM RS-6000.  The make file gives me 
>errors about typedef statements.
>
>Has anyone compiled RCS on the 6000?  I could use some guidance.
Use the "bsdcc" stanze described in /usr/lpp/bos/bsdport.
Change MERGE in the Makefile to /etc/merge (was /usr/bin/merge).
Comment out "typedef int void" from rcsbase.h

If that doesn't fix it send me more specific error output and I'll
see what I can do.

>I'm assuming that RCS is better than SCCS -- if you have feelings on
>that I'd be interested. 
It's a matter of taste mostly.  Both work.  RCS should be faster if
you mostly check out the latest version as it stores backwards deltas
while SCCS stores forward deltas, in practice you probably wont notice
the difference.  However if you use RCS you should check out MCS written
by Brian Berliner, it's been posted to sources groups in the past, I'm
not really sure where you can get it from now (uunet probably).

-- sanders@cactus.org
I am not an IBM representative, I speak only for myself.
I have a wonderful proof that emacs is better than vi,
   unfortunately this .sig is too small to contain it.