On 2/23/11 8:03 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
Uh, no. Use of "svn:eol-style" avoids a world of hurt - programmers do not
have to run a script *every* time they check out a file. Requiring users to
run a script to fix line endings in every sandbox is a recipe for disaster.
"dos2unix" and "unix2dos" are precisely the kind of local rewriting you want
to avoid.
My two cents (and one million lines of code) worth...
Not when the same working working copy is accessible from both Linux
or UNIX, and Windows, as is commonplace in a mixed platform
environment.
There are lots of ways to cause trouble. My opinion is that if it hurts, don't
do it. And that will hurt.
If your working copies on each platform are distinct, you
should be able to get away with it. But hit the same checked out
Windows repository with TortoiseSVN and CygWin, and suddenly you're in
a world of hurt again with the non-binary handling of EOL. Some text
editors will autoparse it for you, but it can get extremely nasty, and
I've had to clean up some serious messes this way.
More things that hurt - and to avoid. But setting eol-style native and using
normal, native tools on each OS isn't one of them.
The messes are aggravated by the lack of the "obliterate" function, to
entirely strip out erroneously configured file additions, and the
difficulty running "diff" operations against files that have been
stored and had their EOL settings updated and their contents revised.
It really messes with "svn diff" operations before and after the
change.
Any time you use dos2unix or the like it is going to be a change in every line
and will screw up any concept of version differences. If svn does it
internally, you don't have that problem.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com
