misleading diagnostic

  > Rick Riolo <rlr at merit.edu> writes:
  > Daniel,
  > thanks for looking at that and noticing those problems.  it didn't really h
  > ave anything
  > to do with reading or not reading the comments:  I just cut, pasted and edi
  > ted another object,
  > probably rt, given the things you pointed out that I forgot to change!

RT.M! ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) :-)

  > re REC, I don't think we will be storing records for ac and tc.  (Dale?...)
  > If we don't, should we just not include the OBJ x REC line at all?

I'd leave it in as a placeholder.  

  > Am I right in thinking that the 'default' parsing in ripe81 just stops
  > at a blank, which lead to the problem cengiz observed?

I don't think so although I am not absolutely sure without digging into the
code.

The problem is that the unique key identifying the object was generated
from the "rt" attribute which probably was not present since it is not
even allowed in "rv". Therefore the keys were equal, therefore the
objects were equal, therefore they updated each other.

Try putting rt in and see.


Daniel



-------- Logged at  Fri Oct 21 19:48:42 MET 1994  ---------