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 _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
