Reading with getwholeline() and manually stripping the terminating
'\n' would leave CR at the end of the line if the input comes from
a DOS editor.

Constrasting this with the previous few changes, one may realize
that the way "log" family of commands read the paths with --stdin
looks inconsistent and sloppy.  It does not allow us to C-quote a
textual input, and it does not accept NUL-terminated records.  These
are unfortunately way too late to fix X-<.

Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com>
---
 revision.c | 9 ++-------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/revision.c b/revision.c
index 2236463..7d100d8 100644
--- a/revision.c
+++ b/revision.c
@@ -1641,10 +1641,7 @@ static void append_prune_data(struct cmdline_pathspec 
*prune, const char **av)
 static void read_pathspec_from_stdin(struct rev_info *revs, struct strbuf *sb,
                                     struct cmdline_pathspec *prune)
 {
-       while (strbuf_getwholeline(sb, stdin, '\n') != EOF) {
-               int len = sb->len;
-               if (len && sb->buf[len - 1] == '\n')
-                       sb->buf[--len] = '\0';
+       while (strbuf_gets(sb, stdin) != EOF) {
                ALLOC_GROW(prune->path, prune->nr + 1, prune->alloc);
                prune->path[prune->nr++] = xstrdup(sb->buf);
        }
@@ -1661,10 +1658,8 @@ static void read_revisions_from_stdin(struct rev_info 
*revs,
        warn_on_object_refname_ambiguity = 0;
 
        strbuf_init(&sb, 1000);
-       while (strbuf_getwholeline(&sb, stdin, '\n') != EOF) {
+       while (strbuf_gets(&sb, stdin) != EOF) {
                int len = sb.len;
-               if (len && sb.buf[len - 1] == '\n')
-                       sb.buf[--len] = '\0';
                if (!len)
                        break;
                if (sb.buf[0] == '-') {
-- 
2.6.2-423-g5314b62

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to