You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@apr.apache.org by Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net> on 2005/11/14 12:02:21 UTC
Win32 build files and eol-style
I'd like to turn the svn:eol-style attribute off for the windown build
files (files ending in .dsp, .dsw and win32ver.awk), and have them
stored in win32 new-line format in the repository.
The reason being that the current format is preventing me from checking
out the repos I have on my unix box, and using samba to share the
working copies with my windows box. That way I can check my changes on
the two platforms a *lot* easier.
It would also have the advantage of making the source tarballs useful on
win32.
The disadvantage is that people editing those files on unix will meed
editors that support win32 endlines, and the commit mails will probably
look ugly too.
Any objections?
--
Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org>.
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
>
>>I see no real reason why they should be forced to have the CRLF line
>>endings in all cases.
>
> Why not? My real reason is wanting to have a single checkout for windows
> and unix work. I'd like to halve the workload associated with verifying
> changes. Visual studio can handle the unix endlines in all of the .c and
> .h files just fine, it's only the build files that are breaking things,
> and these are windows-only files.
>
Well, I agree with you, but OTOH the svn offers something that CVS
never did, and that is native eol style.
I remember days when I was changing .dsw and .dsp files to
binary format (!?).
Anyhow, from my point of view, the things are just fine, because
I don't have to take care of eol style before committing.
If you think that the .dsw and .dsp exceptions would ease the
things, I'm fine with that.
Although I don't see how that would help you create a .zip distro
where all text files must have CRLF line endings.
Regards,
Mladen.
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org>.
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
>
>>I see no real reason why they should be forced to have the CRLF line
>>endings in all cases.
>
> Why not? My real reason is wanting to have a single checkout for windows
> and unix work. I'd like to halve the workload associated with verifying
> changes. Visual studio can handle the unix endlines in all of the .c and
> .h files just fine, it's only the build files that are breaking things,
> and these are windows-only files.
>
Well, I agree with you, but OTOH the svn offers something that CVS
never did, and that is native eol style.
I remember days when I was changing .dsw and .dsp files to
binary format (!?).
Anyhow, from my point of view, the things are just fine, because
I don't have to take care of eol style before committing.
If you think that the .dsw and .dsp exceptions would ease the
things, I'm fine with that.
Although I don't see how that would help you create a .zip distro
where all text files must have CRLF line endings.
Regards,
Mladen.
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>.
On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 01:03:40PM +0100, Mladen Turk wrote:
> Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> >I'd like to turn the svn:eol-style attribute off for the windown build
> >files (files ending in .dsp, .dsw and win32ver.awk), and have them
> >stored in win32 new-line format in the repository.
> >
> >Any objections?
>
> I'm not sure you can use the .dsw and .dsp file outside windows,
They can't be used outside of Windows, they are visual studio files.
> and on windows the files are already in CRLF when checked out
> on that platform.
The problem is that I am checking out on a non-windows platform, but
trying to use them on Windows.
> IMO any .zip source distro should be made with CRLF line endings for all
> non-binary files, so again no problem there.
Yep.
> I see no real reason why they should be forced to have the CRLF line
> endings in all cases.
Why not? My real reason is wanting to have a single checkout for windows
and unix work. I'd like to halve the workload associated with verifying
changes. Visual studio can handle the unix endlines in all of the .c and
.h files just fine, it's only the build files that are breaking things,
and these are windows-only files.
> So, yes, I think it's useless to enforce something like that.
But the files make zero sense in anything other than CRLF format. Using
\n makes them invalid files.
--
Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>.
On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 01:03:40PM +0100, Mladen Turk wrote:
> Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> >I'd like to turn the svn:eol-style attribute off for the windown build
> >files (files ending in .dsp, .dsw and win32ver.awk), and have them
> >stored in win32 new-line format in the repository.
> >
> >Any objections?
>
> I'm not sure you can use the .dsw and .dsp file outside windows,
They can't be used outside of Windows, they are visual studio files.
> and on windows the files are already in CRLF when checked out
> on that platform.
The problem is that I am checking out on a non-windows platform, but
trying to use them on Windows.
> IMO any .zip source distro should be made with CRLF line endings for all
> non-binary files, so again no problem there.
Yep.
> I see no real reason why they should be forced to have the CRLF line
> endings in all cases.
Why not? My real reason is wanting to have a single checkout for windows
and unix work. I'd like to halve the workload associated with verifying
changes. Visual studio can handle the unix endlines in all of the .c and
.h files just fine, it's only the build files that are breaking things,
and these are windows-only files.
> So, yes, I think it's useless to enforce something like that.
But the files make zero sense in anything other than CRLF format. Using
\n makes them invalid files.
--
Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net
Re: Fwd: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
* Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 01:11:05PM +0100, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> > A reason to set the eol-style to CRLF is that *if* someone edits them
> > on unix and accidentally inserts LFs, they're forcibly recoded to CRLF
> > upon commit. Which -obviously- doesn't happen if you don't set an
> > eol-style.
>
> Setting to CRLF makes more sense, it's even ASF recommended ;-)
>
> http://www.apache.org/dev/svn-eol-style.txt
Well, ehm. This is, what those people use, who edit this file. There's no
official recommendation at all.
Said that, I think, using CRLF does no harm.
nd
Re: Fwd: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 01:11:05PM +0100, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
>
> Setting to CRLF makes more sense, it's even ASF recommended ;-)
>
> http://www.apache.org/dev/svn-eol-style.txt
Ahh, good point, thank you for reminding me to fix that misrecommendation.
Bill
Re: Fwd: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 01:11:05PM +0100, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
>
> Setting to CRLF makes more sense, it's even ASF recommended ;-)
>
> http://www.apache.org/dev/svn-eol-style.txt
Ahh, good point, thank you for reminding me to fix that misrecommendation.
Bill
Re: Fwd: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>.
On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 01:11:05PM +0100, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> A reason to set the eol-style to CRLF is that *if* someone edits them
> on unix and accidentally inserts LFs, they're forcibly recoded to CRLF
> upon commit. Which -obviously- doesn't happen if you don't set an
> eol-style.
Setting to CRLF makes more sense, it's even ASF recommended ;-)
http://www.apache.org/dev/svn-eol-style.txt
--
Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net
Re: Fwd: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>.
On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 01:11:05PM +0100, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> A reason to set the eol-style to CRLF is that *if* someone edits them
> on unix and accidentally inserts LFs, they're forcibly recoded to CRLF
> upon commit. Which -obviously- doesn't happen if you don't set an
> eol-style.
Setting to CRLF makes more sense, it's even ASF recommended ;-)
http://www.apache.org/dev/svn-eol-style.txt
--
Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net
Fwd: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by Erik Huelsmann <eh...@gmail.com>.
Sorry, ended up sending my reply to Mladen personally instead of the lists.
bye,
Erik.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Erik Huelsmann <eh...@gmail.com>
Date: Nov 14, 2005 1:10 PM
Subject: Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
To: Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org>
On 11/14/05, Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org> wrote:
> Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> > I'd like to turn the svn:eol-style attribute off for the windown build
> > files (files ending in .dsp, .dsw and win32ver.awk), and have them
> > stored in win32 new-line format in the repository.
> >
> > Any objections?
> >
>
> I'm not sure you can use the .dsw and .dsp file outside windows,
> and on windows the files are already in CRLF when checked out
> on that platform. IMO any .zip source distro should be made with
> CRLF line endings for all non-binary files, so again no problem
> there. There is even a perl script (lineends.pl) for those that
> wish to create CRLF distros on non-windows platform.
>
> I see no real reason why they should be forced to have the CRLF line
> endings in all cases. So, yes, I think it's useless to enforce
> something like that.
A reason to set the eol-style to CRLF is that *if* someone edits them
on unix and accidentally inserts LFs, they're forcibly recoded to CRLF
upon commit. Which -obviously- doesn't happen if you don't set an
eol-style.
bye,
Erik.
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org>.
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> I'd like to turn the svn:eol-style attribute off for the windown build
> files (files ending in .dsp, .dsw and win32ver.awk), and have them
> stored in win32 new-line format in the repository.
>
> Any objections?
>
I'm not sure you can use the .dsw and .dsp file outside windows,
and on windows the files are already in CRLF when checked out
on that platform. IMO any .zip source distro should be made with
CRLF line endings for all non-binary files, so again no problem
there. There is even a perl script (lineends.pl) for those that
wish to create CRLF distros on non-windows platform.
I see no real reason why they should be forced to have the CRLF line
endings in all cases. So, yes, I think it's useless to enforce
something like that.
Regards,
Mladen.
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
* "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> André Malo wrote:
> >
> > I haven't deeply looked into the stuff yet, but subversion for example
> > generates all its *.dsp files in the checkout. Perhaps it's the point where
> > we should do it the same way? That would solve the whole \n problem for
> > these files.
>
> Adding Python as a prerequisite to even checking out the files? No way.
First - in order to check out you don't need python. It would be a *build*
prereq. Second - I suggested to do it similar not to copy it...
> At that point, we have awk (100kb download at most), perl and python all
> depending on exactly what you are trying to do. This isn't overkill?
... it should be no problem to write it in awk or perl. Said that, I'd
nevertheless prefer python ;-)
> On the other hand, perhaps it's time to start distributing .py equivilants
> of the various .pl examples/tools in httpd - permitting users either/or.
>
> FYI - yes I've become a huge fan of python, at least once psyco is added :)
> But it sure violates any principal of KISS.
Other topic.
nd
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
* "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> André Malo wrote:
> >
> > I haven't deeply looked into the stuff yet, but subversion for example
> > generates all its *.dsp files in the checkout. Perhaps it's the point where
> > we should do it the same way? That would solve the whole \n problem for
> > these files.
>
> Adding Python as a prerequisite to even checking out the files? No way.
First - in order to check out you don't need python. It would be a *build*
prereq. Second - I suggested to do it similar not to copy it...
> At that point, we have awk (100kb download at most), perl and python all
> depending on exactly what you are trying to do. This isn't overkill?
... it should be no problem to write it in awk or perl. Said that, I'd
nevertheless prefer python ;-)
> On the other hand, perhaps it's time to start distributing .py equivilants
> of the various .pl examples/tools in httpd - permitting users either/or.
>
> FYI - yes I've become a huge fan of python, at least once psyco is added :)
> But it sure violates any principal of KISS.
Other topic.
nd
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
André Malo wrote:
>
> I haven't deeply looked into the stuff yet, but subversion for example
> generates all its *.dsp files in the checkout. Perhaps it's the point where
> we should do it the same way? That would solve the whole \n problem for
> these files.
Adding Python as a prerequisite to even checking out the files? No way.
At that point, we have awk (100kb download at most), perl and python all
depending on exactly what you are trying to do. This isn't overkill?
On the other hand, perhaps it's time to start distributing .py equivilants
of the various .pl examples/tools in httpd - permitting users either/or.
FYI - yes I've become a huge fan of python, at least once psyco is added :)
But it sure violates any principal of KISS.
Bill
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
André Malo wrote:
>
> I haven't deeply looked into the stuff yet, but subversion for example
> generates all its *.dsp files in the checkout. Perhaps it's the point where
> we should do it the same way? That would solve the whole \n problem for
> these files.
Adding Python as a prerequisite to even checking out the files? No way.
At that point, we have awk (100kb download at most), perl and python all
depending on exactly what you are trying to do. This isn't overkill?
On the other hand, perhaps it's time to start distributing .py equivilants
of the various .pl examples/tools in httpd - permitting users either/or.
FYI - yes I've become a huge fan of python, at least once psyco is added :)
But it sure violates any principal of KISS.
Bill
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
* William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 11:14:13AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> >>>It would also have the advantage of making the source tarballs useful
> >>> on win32.
> >>
> >>Ditto, above
> >
> > But we don't do that for the source tarballs.
>
> No, we do it for the source zipfile, and it's that way in the unix
> script.
I haven't deeply looked into the stuff yet, but subversion for example
generates all its *.dsp files in the checkout. Perhaps it's the point where
we should do it the same way? That would solve the whole \n problem for
these files.
nd
--
Da fällt mir ein, wieso gibt es eigentlich in Unicode kein
"i" mit einem Herzchen als Tüpfelchen? Das wär sooo süüss!
-- Björn Höhrmann in darw
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
* William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 11:14:13AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> >>>It would also have the advantage of making the source tarballs useful
> >>> on win32.
> >>
> >>Ditto, above
> >
> > But we don't do that for the source tarballs.
>
> No, we do it for the source zipfile, and it's that way in the unix
> script.
I haven't deeply looked into the stuff yet, but subversion for example
generates all its *.dsp files in the checkout. Perhaps it's the point where
we should do it the same way? That would solve the whole \n problem for
these files.
nd
--
Da fällt mir ein, wieso gibt es eigentlich in Unicode kein
"i" mit einem Herzchen als Tüpfelchen? Das wär sooo süüss!
-- Björn Höhrmann in darw
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 11:14:13AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>>>It would also have the advantage of making the source tarballs useful on
>>>win32.
>>
>>Ditto, above
>
> But we don't do that for the source tarballs.
No, we do it for the source zipfile, and it's that way in the unix script.
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 11:14:13AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>>>It would also have the advantage of making the source tarballs useful on
>>>win32.
>>
>>Ditto, above
>
> But we don't do that for the source tarballs.
No, we do it for the source zipfile, and it's that way in the unix script.
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
>>>It would also have the advantage of making the source tarballs useful on
>>>win32.
>>
>>Ditto, above
>
> But we don't do that for the source tarballs.
Reply-to: httpd...
In fact we not only do an svn CRLF dos checkout for httpd, we also generate
the appropriate .mak/.dep files, adding in apr-iconv along with apr-util and
apr as distributed for unix, when packaging Win32. The generated .rc files
are also included. Ergo the httpd...-src.zip file is ready-to-go on Win32,
for anyone using VC 5 or later. Folks who want a GUI build on Studio .NET
need to load the Apache.dsw, which is automatically converted to Apache.sln.
There is no point to distributing .sln files, since .NET Studio converts for
interactive users, and the command line build simply uses the .mak files.
The reason Apache can't be maintained in an .sln/.vcproj format is that MS
decided .mak exports weren't worthwhile, as it prevented them from forcing
users to upgrade every two years by allowing the user to keep using old
tools. So studio.net can't export .sln's to .mak's for all compilers, since
it's not a profitable feature.
Bill
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>.
On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 11:14:13AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> >The reason being that the current format is preventing me from checking
> >out the repos I have on my unix box, and using samba to share the
> >working copies with my windows box. That way I can check my changes on
> >the two platforms a *lot* easier.
>
> svn export --native-eol CRLF
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk
>
> What's not easy?
I only want those files in CRLF. I like to be able to use lots of
standard UNIX command line utilities on the .c and .h files, but I'll go
see how nicely having differently checkout out files within a single
repo works.
> >It would also have the advantage of making the source tarballs useful on
> >win32.
>
> Ditto, above
But we don't do that for the source tarballs.
> >The disadvantage is that people editing those files on unix will meed
> >editors that support win32 endlines, and the commit mails will
> >probably look ugly too.
>
> Yes, and, consider a .patch text file. On Unix, if the .patch file is
> normal text (\n) and you've checked out binary crud for win32 mak
> files, the patch simply won't apply.
This is a reason.
--
Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>.
On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 11:14:13AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> >The reason being that the current format is preventing me from checking
> >out the repos I have on my unix box, and using samba to share the
> >working copies with my windows box. That way I can check my changes on
> >the two platforms a *lot* easier.
>
> svn export --native-eol CRLF
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk
>
> What's not easy?
I only want those files in CRLF. I like to be able to use lots of
standard UNIX command line utilities on the .c and .h files, but I'll go
see how nicely having differently checkout out files within a single
repo works.
> >It would also have the advantage of making the source tarballs useful on
> >win32.
>
> Ditto, above
But we don't do that for the source tarballs.
> >The disadvantage is that people editing those files on unix will meed
> >editors that support win32 endlines, and the commit mails will
> >probably look ugly too.
>
> Yes, and, consider a .patch text file. On Unix, if the .patch file is
> normal text (\n) and you've checked out binary crud for win32 mak
> files, the patch simply won't apply.
This is a reason.
--
Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> I'd like to turn the svn:eol-style attribute off for the windown build
> files (files ending in .dsp, .dsw and win32ver.awk), and have them
> stored in win32 new-line format in the repository.
-1 veto, not vote. They are TEXT. Subversion allows you to check out or
export a win32/dos-style tree on Unix, so the previous CVS arguements are
all moot.
> The reason being that the current format is preventing me from checking
> out the repos I have on my unix box, and using samba to share the
> working copies with my windows box. That way I can check my changes on
> the two platforms a *lot* easier.
svn export --native-eol CRLF http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk
What's not easy?
> It would also have the advantage of making the source tarballs useful on
> win32.
Ditto, above
> The disadvantage is that people editing those files on unix will meed
> editors that support win32 endlines, and the commit mails will probably
> look ugly too.
Yes, and, consider a .patch text file. On Unix, if the .patch file is normal
text (\n) and you've checked out binary crud for win32 mak files, the patch
simply won't apply. Don't suggest a binary .patch file of some \r\n files and
some \n files, because then if you are patching on win32, it won't apply to the
plain text files (or you end up with mixed up \r\n and \n newlines in a single
text files). And the mixed \n - \r\n .patch file is completely uneditable.
For that primary example, and dozens of derivatives, the answer's always NO!
:)
Bill
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> I'd like to turn the svn:eol-style attribute off for the windown build
> files (files ending in .dsp, .dsw and win32ver.awk), and have them
> stored in win32 new-line format in the repository.
-1 veto, not vote. They are TEXT. Subversion allows you to check out or
export a win32/dos-style tree on Unix, so the previous CVS arguements are
all moot.
> The reason being that the current format is preventing me from checking
> out the repos I have on my unix box, and using samba to share the
> working copies with my windows box. That way I can check my changes on
> the two platforms a *lot* easier.
svn export --native-eol CRLF http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk
What's not easy?
> It would also have the advantage of making the source tarballs useful on
> win32.
Ditto, above
> The disadvantage is that people editing those files on unix will meed
> editors that support win32 endlines, and the commit mails will probably
> look ugly too.
Yes, and, consider a .patch text file. On Unix, if the .patch file is normal
text (\n) and you've checked out binary crud for win32 mak files, the patch
simply won't apply. Don't suggest a binary .patch file of some \r\n files and
some \n files, because then if you are patching on win32, it won't apply to the
plain text files (or you end up with mixed up \r\n and \n newlines in a single
text files). And the mixed \n - \r\n .patch file is completely uneditable.
For that primary example, and dozens of derivatives, the answer's always NO!
:)
Bill
Re: Win32 build files and eol-style
Posted by Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org>.
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> I'd like to turn the svn:eol-style attribute off for the windown build
> files (files ending in .dsp, .dsw and win32ver.awk), and have them
> stored in win32 new-line format in the repository.
>
> Any objections?
>
I'm not sure you can use the .dsw and .dsp file outside windows,
and on windows the files are already in CRLF when checked out
on that platform. IMO any .zip source distro should be made with
CRLF line endings for all non-binary files, so again no problem
there. There is even a perl script (lineends.pl) for those that
wish to create CRLF distros on non-windows platform.
I see no real reason why they should be forced to have the CRLF line
endings in all cases. So, yes, I think it's useless to enforce
something like that.
Regards,
Mladen.