> Sent: 06 April 2004 16:20 From: Dave Korn
..snip..
> > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Hughes, Bill
> > Sent: 06 April 2004 14:59
>
> > > Sent: 06 April 2004 14:10 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > ..snip..
> > > Please can you tell me how to grep for an ASCII 00 (and for
> > > that matter
> > > an
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004, fergus wrote:
> >> GNU grep detects binary files by looking for a '\0' byte.
>
> I know this is not strictly Cygwin-specific but it _is_ generated by the
> preceding relevant recent comment in a busy thread:
>
> Please can you tell me how to grep for an ASCII 00 (and for that m
Advocacy: Remove irrelevant, i.e. not objective and 100% prooved, "safety
code".
> From: Dave Korn
> > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of fergus
> > Sent: 06 April 2004 14:10
>
> > >> GNU grep detects binary files by looking for a '\0' byte.
> >
> > I know this is not strictly Cygwin-specific but it
> -Original Message-
> From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of fergus
> Sent: 06 April 2004 14:10
> >> GNU grep detects binary files by looking for a '\0' byte.
>
> I know this is not strictly Cygwin-specific but it _is_
> generated by the
> preceding relevant recent comment in a busy thread:
>
> -Original Message-
> From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Hughes, Bill
> Sent: 06 April 2004 14:59
> > Sent: 06 April 2004 14:10 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ..snip..
>
> >
> > Please can you tell me how to grep for an ASCII 00 (and for
> > that matter
> > anything from ASCII 1B to 1F, and 7
> Sent: 06 April 2004 14:10 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
..snip..
>
> Please can you tell me how to grep for an ASCII 00 (and for
> that matter
> anything from ASCII 1B to 1F, and 7F to FF)?
I'm no expert but
grep [\x00] foo.bar
might be what you're after.
> (Or, I suppose in general for any of 00
>> GNU grep detects binary files by looking for a '\0' byte.
I know this is not strictly Cygwin-specific but it _is_ generated by the
preceding relevant recent comment in a busy thread:
Please can you tell me how to grep for an ASCII 00 (and for that matter
anything from ASCII 1B to 1F, and 7F
> -Original Message-
> From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Ken Thompson
> Sent: 05 April 2004 12:40
> I don't think the behavior should be changed. d2u stands for
> dos to unix
> which means \r\n to \n. Why would one expect a dos to unix utility to
> convert mixed line terminator files.
W
> From: Ken Thompson
> I don't think the behavior should be changed. d2u stands for dos to unix
> which means \r\n to \n. Why would one expect a dos to unix utility to
> convert mixed line terminator files. If you need such a utility, then
> add one but don't take a utility that does dos to unix
> From: David Fritz
> You guys are missing the point. Charles Wilson mentioned a side
> effect of the
> code at issue in the original post and suggested that it was valuable.
I'm opposing the 'valuable' in this. Running commands from the prompt has
always required some knowledge and thought. Th
work is needed if one also wishes to handle Mac line endings
("\r"). ;-)
- Barry
-Original Message-
From: Ken Thompson
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 7:40 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Bogus assumption prevents d2u/u2d/conv/etal working on mixed
files.
I don't think t
> I'd like to see what some other users, who haven't yet stated
> their opinions, have to say...
Change it, say I. If I run d2u/u2d on a binary file, on my
head be it.
--
Best wishes,
Max Hyre
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygw
Ken Thompson wrote:
I don't think the behavior should be changed. d2u stands for dos to unix
which means \r\n to \n. Why would one expect a dos to unix utility to
convert mixed line terminator files. If you need such a utility, then add
one but don't take a utility that does dos to unix and try
n it in to
"anything" to unix or if you do then change the name. Just my 2 cents worth
> -Original Message-
> From: Charles Wilson
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 12:33 AM
> Subject: Re: Bogus assumption prevents d2u/u2d/conv/etal working on
> mixed files.
>
&
> -Original Message-
> From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Charles Wilson
> Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 11:33 PM
>
[...]
>
> I think there is some misunderstanding about the cygutils package. I
> did not write any of it.(*) I do not defend any of the
> design decisions
> that were made
TECTED]
Subject: Re: Bogus assumption prevents d2u/u2d/conv/etal working on mixed
files.
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 00:32:36 -0400
David Fritz wrote:
You guys are missing the point. Charles Wilson mentioned a side effect of
the code at issue in the original post and suggested that it was valuable.
I think
David Fritz wrote:
You guys are missing the point. Charles Wilson mentioned a side effect
of the code at issue in the original post and suggested that it was
valuable.
I think there is some misunderstanding about the cygutils package. I
did not write any of it.(*) I do not defend any of the d
You guys are missing the point. Charles Wilson mentioned a side effect of the
code at issue in the original post and suggested that it was valuable.
Personally, I don't care if they attempt to detect binary files or not. My
point was (and is) that: *If detection of binary files is desirable*,
On Sun, 4 Apr 2004, GARY VANSICKLE wrote:
> > Noo... Please, remove all of these safety checks.
> > There must be some kind of user sanity presupposition. Or else the tools
> > soon will be crippled to a state where they are unusable for normal work.
>
> FWIW I'm with Hannu. Should rm ask you, "
> Noo... Please, remove all of these safety checks.
> There must be some kind of user sanity presupposition. Or else the tools
> soon will be crippled to a state where they are unusable for normal work.
FWIW I'm with Hannu. Should rm ask you, "Do you *really* want to delete
this file?", or make
On Sat, 3 Apr 2004, David Fritz wrote:
> Charles Wilson wrote:
> [...]
> > (2) it's an attempt to prevent users from permanently scrogging binary
> > files. See: d2u, on a binary file, is an irreversible operation. So,
> > if you do "d2u *" you'll probably kill something deep inside some binar
> From: David Fritz
> Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 6:46 AM
> Charles Wilson wrote:
> [...]
> > (2) it's an attempt to prevent users from permanently
> scrogging binary
> > files. See: d2u, on a binary file, is an irreversible operation. So,
> > if you do "d2u *" you'll probably kill something
Charles Wilson wrote:
[...]
(2) it's an attempt to prevent users from permanently scrogging binary
files. See: d2u, on a binary file, is an irreversible operation. So,
if you do "d2u *" you'll probably kill something deep inside some binary
file, and you can't fix it -- unless some minimal s
On Fri, 2 Apr 2004, Charles Wilson wrote:
> Dave Korn wrote:
>
> > I was pretty stunned to find d2u didn't have the same effect as tr -d. A
> > few seconds work in the debugger, however, made it clear.
> >
> > Right inside conv.c, in the main convert (...) function, there's an
> > attempted o
Dave Korn wrote:
I was pretty stunned to find d2u didn't have the same effect as tr -d. A
few seconds work in the debugger, however, made it clear.
Right inside conv.c, in the main convert (...) function, there's an
attempted optimisation. After opening the file for conversion, it reads a
ch
25 matches
Mail list logo
