[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions
From: |
Yury Polyanskiy |
Subject: |
Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions |
Date: |
Tue, 31 Jan 2006 07:37:15 -0500 |
On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 07:36 -0500, Ethan Blanton wrote:
> This is precisely why Yury is correct. Because, on many systems, \r
> and \n have _different meanings_, they should be properly and
> reversibly preserved even in text files. What Yury is saying, if I
> understand it correctly, is that the following file:
>
> Now is the time\rfor all good\nmen to come to the aid\rof their country.\n
>
> Would be, after a checkout and checkin with a hook like Yury's:
>
> Now is the time\nfor all good\nmen to come to the aid\nof their country.\n
>
> This is clearly *not* what one would expect, given the contents of
> Yury's hook, binary or not-binary. Preserving binary files without
> conversion is an orthogonal problem. In this case, the problem
> happened to present itself in binary files, but it would seem to me to
> be a problem for text files which take advantage of the semantics of
> \r and \n, as well.
>
> Yury, please correct me if I've misunderstood the situation.
>
Ethan, you're perfectly right. One more example is a text file with
no-eol-at-eof. In current implementation checkin->checkout processes the
file is fed through split_lines(), join_lines() which results in adding
eol-at-eof. So this is another surprise for the user.
(I'm taking purely real life example: that's what I did -- I needed to
commit a patch sent by a windows developer, so I decided to checkout
CRLF-ed versions and then apply diff. However, after just making
"monotone co", "monotone status" I see a lot of changed TEXT files.)
> Ethan
Cheers,
-up
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, (continued)
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Yury Polyanskiy, 2006/01/29
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker, 2006/01/29
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Yury Polyanskiy, 2006/01/29
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker, 2006/01/30
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Ethan Blanton, 2006/01/30
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker, 2006/01/30
- [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Bruce Stephens, 2006/01/30
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Yury Polyanskiy, 2006/01/31
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Matthew Hannigan, 2006/01/31
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker, 2006/01/31
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions,
Yury Polyanskiy <=
- [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Bruce Stephens, 2006/01/29
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Larry Hastings, 2006/01/29
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker, 2006/01/30
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Jon Bright, 2006/01/30
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker, 2006/01/30
- [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Bruce Stephens, 2006/01/30
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Zbynek Winkler, 2006/01/30
- [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Bruce Stephens, 2006/01/30
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Larry Hastings, 2006/01/30
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker, 2006/01/30