mkdir RCS
ci -u file.pl # check in file (inital touched version)
co -l file.pl # check out file to make revisions
....
rlog file.pl # history of a file
rcsdiff -r1.2 file.pl # diff versions of files
co -r1.2 file.pl # get an earlier version of a file
[download]

my $v = q{$Id$};
print "$v\n";

or simply
# $Id$
[download]

rlog file.pl # display a log history of the file changes from version 
+to version...
[download]

i agree in zakzebrowskis opinion. RCS is really simple to use, as handy tools should be.
Several times, i thought about trying out cvs, but because I'm exclusive user with my own (tiny) developements rcs suffices completly my needs.

---

Is simplicity best or simply the easiest Martin L. Gore

I am missing RCS in the list...

So do I.
It's RCS and RCS is the rcs I use most of the time.
Typing documentation into a KwikiWiki using RCS is most of my using revision control.
Not counting when I use CVS, I use that for the code, but still a lot less than simple RCS... heck, I wanted to say that I would prefer to use Subversion, so that's my prefered rcs although I hardly ever use it.

Cheers, Sören

I debated putting RCS on the list; after all it's the grandaddy of em all, and is still in live use by some people (or so I hear). OTOH, it was strange enough that I wanted to encourage people to write a note about it, rather then just going click-click and voting for it. Why do you like RCS better then, say, CVS (which is just a layer on top of it, after all...)?

I also wanted to pick RCS (I ended up picking CVS, because that's what we use at the lab).

RCS is nice because it's simple. You don't have to worry about pservers or creating a repository somewhere with proper permissions... just say mkdir RCS and you're there. Checkin/checkout is simple, with no extra commit stage. It's quick and easy and doesn't require any setup or administration.

I like using RCS during OS installs (a trick taught to me by a sysadmin I worked with, the kind who had plenty of time on his hands to teach newbies because his network rarely broke). Before messing with any config files, make an RCS directory and check them in. We had /etc/RCS, /usr/local/etc/RCS, and a lot of /var/www/foobar/RCSes. Handy when you want to back out a change, but haven't installed CVS yet.

I don't think I'd want to try using RCS for big projects, and using RCS for big distributed projects would be a nightmare. CVS is better for those (and I'd like to try Subversion one of these days), but that doesn't mean I like it any better.

--
F o x t r o t U n i f o r m
Found a typo in this node? /msg me
% man 3 strfry

Although a quick Google didn't find a link to prove me right, I have the distinct feeling that SCCS takes the grand-daddy prize over RCS... can anyone confirm/deny?

--
edan

From my research, or what I remember of it, SCCS is a (slightly older) prohproitary system, and RCS is the GNU clone of it. Thus, while SCCS is technically older, I consider them to be the same thing.

---

Warning: Unless otherwise stated, code is untested. Do not use without understanding. Code is posted in the hopes it is useful, but without warranty. All copyrights are relinquished into the public domain unless otherwise stated. I am not an angel. I am capable of error, and err on a fairly regular basis. If I made a mistake, please let me know (such as by replying to this node).

/me wonders how quick this search was.
anyway, while searching for RCS on google, i found this link which say,

RCS design was an improvement from its predecessor Source Code Control
+ System (SCCS)
[download]

I guess SCCS was the grand-daddy or RCS...

---

monoxide
I am undecided...