> Or are there some features not working with textmode when using
> autotools? I think this could almost be expected because those
> LFs IMHO can be really painfull...
there also some issues while using autotools.
one example are linefeeds in macros, i.e.
AC_CONFIG_FILES([
x
])
will produce strange results if used with DOS linefeeds.
this makes some guys think, it might be better to mark those files as
binary in cvs and maintain it using unix linefeeds, even in a DOS
environment.
strange conclusion ... that's my experience.
> One feature with issues with LF translation is "make dist" (even
> with export CYGWIN=binmode).
this seems to be an issue of tar, because it can be avoided with the
automake option "tar-pax" (without knowing what exactly this does).
>> Use of binmode mounts means that you don't have to worry about
>> spurious carriage returns getting inserted in files by tools
>> that speak text, only to confuse tools that only speak binary.
this is exactly my experience, too. I am using binmode only since many
years without real issues.
>> Textmode mounts, on the other hand, are painful to
>> manage without a lot of care.
this is true only for some tools, not most of them. unfortunately
microsoft visual studio is one them, which is used often in
development.
but as a developper, I see no problem for handling it.
> I think with binmode mounts practically ALL (windows)
> tools fail, but of course heavily depends on the used tools.
I would say, most windows tools are able to handle linux linefeeds.
only some can't, and for me, it is no problem to avoid using them.
regards, carsten
_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@xxxxxxx
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
