Re: [PATCH 0/2] Re* Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-31 Thread Jeff King
On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 09:41:25AM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 7:44 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Stefan Beller writes: > > > >> (I note this as you regard your patches as a lunch time hack > >> in the cooking email; I am serious

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Re* Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-31 Thread Stefan Beller
On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 7:44 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Stefan Beller writes: > >> (I note this as you regard your patches as a lunch time hack >> in the cooking email; I am serious about these patches though.) > > We do not want to touch borrowed code

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Re* Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-30 Thread Junio C Hamano
Stefan Beller writes: > (I note this as you regard your patches as a lunch time hack > in the cooking email; I am serious about these patches though.) We do not want to touch borrowed code unnecessarily. Are these lines and bits hampering further progress we are actively

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Re* Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-30 Thread Stefan Beller
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: >> Let's do this bit-shuffling as a preliminary clean-up. > > These 2 patches can go on top of that as well. Actually these textually do not conflict with your patch, and they can be picked independently, e.g. they could

[PATCH 0/2] Re* Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-27 Thread Stefan Beller
> Let's do this bit-shuffling as a preliminary clean-up. These 2 patches can go on top of that as well. Thanks, Stefan Stefan Beller (2): xdiff/xdiff.h: remove unused flags xdiff/xdiffi.c: remove unneeded function declarations xdiff/xdiff.h | 8 xdiff/xdiffi.c | 17

Re: Re* Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-27 Thread Stefan Beller
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Subject: [PATCH] xdiff: reassign xpparm_t.flags bits > > We have packed the bits too tightly in such a way that it is not > easy to add a new type of whitespace ignoring option, a new type > of LCS algorithm, or a new

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-27 Thread Johannes Schindelin
Hi Lars, On Thu, 26 Oct 2017, Lars Schneider wrote: > > On 26 Oct 2017, at 09:09, Johannes Sixt wrote: > > > > Am 25.10.2017 um 14:19 schrieb Johannes Schindelin: > >> I envy you for the blessing of such a clean C++ source that you do not > >> have any, say, Unix shell script in

Re* Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-27 Thread Junio C Hamano
Junio C Hamano writes: > Stefan Beller writes: > >> (1<<5) is taken twice now. > > Good eyes. I think we use bits #1-#8 now (bit #0 is vacant, so are > #9-#31). Let's do this bit-shuffling as a preliminary clean-up. -- >8 -- Subject: [PATCH] xdiff:

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-26 Thread Junio C Hamano
Ross Kabus writes: > Is "* -text" in any way different than "-text" (without the * asterisk)? All > of my .gitattributes files have "-text" (no * asterisk) and I haven't noticed > any difference but could I be missing something subtle? > > ~Ross A line in the .gitattibute

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-26 Thread Ross Kabus
Is "* -text" in any way different than "-text" (without the * asterisk)? All of my .gitattributes files have "-text" (no * asterisk) and I haven't noticed any difference but could I be missing something subtle? ~Ross

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-26 Thread Johannes Sixt
Thank you for the clarification, it's much appreciated. -- Hannes

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-26 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Johannes Sixt wrote: > Am 26.10.2017 um 13:01 schrieb Lars Schneider: >> * -text >> *.sh text eol=lf > > Why would that be necessary? I cannot have CRLF in shell scripts etc., not > even on Windows. (And in addition I do not mind CR in C++ source code.) All > I want is: Git, please, by all

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-26 Thread Johannes Sixt
Am 26.10.2017 um 13:01 schrieb Lars Schneider: On 26 Oct 2017, at 09:09, Johannes Sixt wrote: Am 25.10.2017 um 14:19 schrieb Johannes Schindelin: I envy you for the blessing of such a clean C++ source that you do not have any, say, Unix shell script in it. Try this, and weep:

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-26 Thread Torsten Bögershausen
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 01:01:25PM +0200, Lars Schneider wrote: > > > On 26 Oct 2017, at 09:09, Johannes Sixt wrote: > > > > Am 25.10.2017 um 14:19 schrieb Johannes Schindelin: > >> I envy you for the blessing of such a clean C++ source that you do not > >> have any, say, Unix

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-26 Thread Torsten Bögershausen
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:13:57AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Hi again, > > Lars Schneider wrote: > >> On 24 Oct 2017, at 20:14, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > >> In any event, you also probably want to declare what you're doing > >> using .gitattributes. By checking in

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-26 Thread Lars Schneider
> On 25 Oct 2017, at 19:13, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > Hi again, > > Lars Schneider wrote: >>> On 24 Oct 2017, at 20:14, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > >>> In any event, you also probably want to declare what you're doing >>> using .gitattributes. By

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-26 Thread Lars Schneider
> On 26 Oct 2017, at 09:09, Johannes Sixt wrote: > > Am 25.10.2017 um 14:19 schrieb Johannes Schindelin: >> I envy you for the blessing of such a clean C++ source that you do not >> have any, say, Unix shell script in it. Try this, and weep: >> $ printf 'echo

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-26 Thread Johannes Sixt
Am 25.10.2017 um 14:19 schrieb Johannes Schindelin: I envy you for the blessing of such a clean C++ source that you do not have any, say, Unix shell script in it. Try this, and weep: $ printf 'echo \\\r\n\t123\r\n' >a1 $ sh a1 a1: 2: a1: 123: not found I was bitten

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-25 Thread Junio C Hamano
Stefan Beller writes: >> diff --git a/diff.c b/diff.c >> index 6fd288420b..eeca0fd3b8 100644 >> --- a/diff.c >> +++ b/diff.c >> @@ -4202,7 +4202,8 @@ void diff_setup_done(struct diff_options *options) >> >> if (DIFF_XDL_TST(options, IGNORE_WHITESPACE) || >>

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-25 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Hi again, Lars Schneider wrote: >> On 24 Oct 2017, at 20:14, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> In any event, you also probably want to declare what you're doing >> using .gitattributes. By checking in the files as CRLF, you are >> declaring that you do *not* want Git to treat them

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-25 Thread Lars Schneider
> On 24 Oct 2017, at 20:14, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > Hi, > > Lars Schneider wrote: > >> I've migrated a large repo (110k+ files) with a lot of history (177k commits) >> and a lot of users (200+) to Git. Unfortunately, all text files in the index >> of the repo have CRLF

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-25 Thread Stefan Beller
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 9:53 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Here is a lunch-time hack to add that option. As you can see from > the lack of docs, tests and a proper log message, I haven't played > with it long enough to know how buggy it is, though. I am not all > that

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-25 Thread Johannes Schindelin
Hi Hannes, On Tue, 24 Oct 2017, Johannes Sixt wrote: > Am 24.10.2017 um 19:48 schrieb Lars Schneider: > > I've migrated a large repo (110k+ files) with a lot of history (177k > > commits) > > and a lot of users (200+) to Git. Unfortunately, all text files in the index > > of the repo have CRLF

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-25 Thread Johannes Schindelin
Hi, On Tue, 24 Oct 2017, Torsten Bögershausen wrote: > The penalty may be low, but Dscho once reported that it [line endings > conversion] is measurable & painful on a "big repo". Yes, I do not remember the details, but it must have been around 5-15% speed improvement to prevent the autoCRLF

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-24 Thread Junio C Hamano
Junio C Hamano writes: > Jonathan Nieder writes: > >> I'd be interested to hear what happens when diff-ing across a line >> ending fixup commit. Is this an area where Git needs some >> improvement? "git merge" knows an -Xrenormalize option to deal with a

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-24 Thread Junio C Hamano
Jonathan Nieder writes: > I'd be interested to hear what happens when diff-ing across a line > ending fixup commit. Is this an area where Git needs some > improvement? "git merge" knows an -Xrenormalize option to deal with a > related problem --- it's possible that "git

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-24 Thread Johannes Sixt
Am 24.10.2017 um 19:48 schrieb Lars Schneider: I've migrated a large repo (110k+ files) with a lot of history (177k commits) and a lot of users (200+) to Git. Unfortunately, all text files in the index of the repo have CRLF line endings. In general this seems not to be a problem as the project

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-24 Thread Torsten Bögershausen
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:14:15AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Hi, > > Lars Schneider wrote: > > > I've migrated a large repo (110k+ files) with a lot of history (177k > > commits) > > and a lot of users (200+) to Git. Unfortunately, all text files in the index > > of the repo have CRLF

Re: Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-24 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Hi, Lars Schneider wrote: > I've migrated a large repo (110k+ files) with a lot of history (177k commits) > and a lot of users (200+) to Git. Unfortunately, all text files in the index > of the repo have CRLF line endings. In general this seems not to be a problem > as the project is developed

Consequences of CRLF in index?

2017-10-24 Thread Lars Schneider
Hi, I've migrated a large repo (110k+ files) with a lot of history (177k commits) and a lot of users (200+) to Git. Unfortunately, all text files in the index of the repo have CRLF line endings. In general this seems not to be a problem as the project is developed exclusively on Windows.