Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 32074 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2004 22:17:28 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 9 Dec 2004 22:17:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 76093 invoked by uid 500); 9 Dec 2004 22:17:25 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apr-dev-archive@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 76059 invoked by uid 500); 9 Dec 2004 22:17:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@apr.apache.org Received: (qmail 76043 invoked by uid 99); 9 Dec 2004 22:17:25 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Message-ID: <41B8CF17.7070304@xbc.nu> Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 23:17:59 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?QnJhbmtvIMSMaWJlag==?= User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Garrett Rooney Cc: dev@apr.apache.org Subject: Re: Compilation on Windows References: <41B882A8.4060100@lri.fr> <41B8C6C4.3000805@xbc.nu> <41B8C77C.2020809@electricjellyfish.net> In-Reply-To: <41B8C77C.2020809@electricjellyfish.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at amis.net X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.587 required=5 tests=AWL, BAYES_00 X-Spam-Level: X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Garrett Rooney wrote: > Bill Rowe objected to setting them to CRLF because of the way it would > intereact with diff programs on various systems. I see. Well, I'd like to see some proof that using CRLF eol-stylewould really cause problems with "svn diff" (not ordinary diff!) on any system, because using native eol-style is simply a lie and therefore broken. -- Brane