Re: [PATCH 2/2] docs: correct documentation about eol attribute

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2022-01-11 at 18:30:03, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
> Hej Brian,
> thanks for digging into this.
> 
> Could you be so kind to send the stackoverflow issue ?
> (You can send it to me only)

I'll just post it here publicly, since I think there's value to folks
seeing what questions users have:

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/70633469/what-is-the-difference-between-text-auto-and-text-auto-eol-lf/70636508?

> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 02:15:07AM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:
> >  Note that setting this attribute on paths which
> > +are in the index with CRLF line endings may make the paths to be
> > +considered dirty. Adding the path to the index again will normalize the
> > +line endings in the index.
> 
> I think that this can be loosened as well. And, beside this, the "dirty"
> warning about setting attributes could be written as part of the "text"
> attribute as well. I dunno. Here is a possible suggestion:
> 
> 
>   Note that setting this attribute on paths which are in the index with CRLF
>   line endings may make the paths to be considered dirty - unless "text=auto"
>   is set. `git ls-files --eol` can be used to check the "line ending status".
>   Adding the path to the index again will normalize the line endings in the index.

I'm not sure that's correct, though.  The problem is if the file is
detected as text, which it might well be if text=auto is set.  Or am I
not understanding something correctly?
-- 
brian m. carlson (he/him or they/them)
Toronto, Ontario, CA

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux