apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guenter Knauf <fua...@apache.org>
Subject Re: svn:eol-style for autoconf stuff
Date Wed, 16 Feb 2011 22:54:29 GMT
Bill,
Am 16.02.2011 21:56, schrieb William A. Rowe Jr.:
>> another observation on this topic:
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/svn-eol-style.txt
>> this config file suggests that we should treat *.ds? files as CRLF, and this is pretty
>> much same as what I suggested for the autoconf files ...
>> though at least APR/APU doesnt follow this recommendation, and *.ds? files are
>> 'svn:eol-style native' in svn repo.
>
> This is precisely incorrect advice, neither apr, httpd nor tomcat are party
> to such nonsense (which makes the recommendation REALLY odd, because I'm
> just wondering who's left?)  Have you ever tried to apply a patch containing
> diffs of files in alternating line end conventions?  Surely not, or this
> nonsense wouldn't be debated.
surely often enough -  believe me.

> Preserving this metadata when moving files
> around, say between svn and git?  Be real.
>
> The advise is wrong for the same reasons as LF format on Windows is wrong.
>
> Look, I started at these projects (helped start apr) when the windows guy
> was the windows guy, that aix guy was the aix guy, and on, and on, and on.
> It was horribly broken and the chances of building on all platforms at
> any given time was pretty slim.
>
> Today, dev@ who work with windows are willing to take a best guess at
> some config.m4 change, and our unix dev@ kin are willing to stub in what
> seems to be a proper .dsp file, just to see if it works.
>
> That is where we want to be, so all nonsense to the contrary particularly
> ticks me off, and that goes in both directions (win32 or unix text files).
> If you read the 100's of messages in the archives, you will be well aware
> this is a dead horse, and painting bikesheds is also very irritating.
all the above was not needed to exlain since I didnt suggest to go that 
route - as you even quoted from my previous post further down; and 
anyway why should I suggest this? The *.ds? files are pretty much 
useless on any other platform than windows (so can be LF on any platform 
but windows), and on windows they are always properly checked out with 
'svn:eol-style native' ...

>> Although I **dont** want to suggest now here that we chance that - *if* the *.ds?
files
>> were 'svn:eol-style CRLF' in svn then our daily snapshots would work for Windows
MSVC
>> users too.
>
> If this is about snapshot builds, and checking out images on the wrong platform,
> then I want to be certain you are aware of the svn export --native-eol feature?
> It's trivial to post both .tar.gz and .zip files from our snapshot'er.
if you would have read my reply you would know that I'm aware of - see 
my post from 2011-02-15 00:42 UTC - quote:

 > If you are foolish enough to mix vc ports of svn with cyg, or visa versa,
 > you have what is coming to you :)
yeah, and since there's nowhere a MSYS SVN binary which would do it 
'right' I would have to either use Cygwin then, or cant work directly 
from svn, but need to always do a 'svn export --native-eol LF' in order 
to get the configure scripts in 'right' format ...
/end qoute

beside that I have my own snapshots which Win32 MSVC folks prefer, and 
these are build with 'svn export --native-eol CRLF' on Linux:
http://svwe20.itex.at/snapshots/
the 7zip archives are all CRLF.
And that mostly because "our snapshot'er" doesnt do so.

Ok, I stop now nerving you since you're anyway not willing to give me a 
technical background for your opinion ...

Peace, Gün.



Mime
View raw message