You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Daniel Shahaf <da...@elego.de> on 2011/11/28 20:19:19 UTC

Re: [Issue 4070] forced update doesn't correct eols of existing obstructions

pburba@tigris.org wrote on Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 10:54:12 -0800:
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4070
> 
> 
> 
> User pburba changed the following:
> 
>                 What    |Old value                 |New value
> ================================================================================
>                   Status|NEW                       |RESOLVED
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>               Resolution|                          |INVALID
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------- Additional comments from pburba@tigris.org Mon Nov 28 10:54:12 -0800 2011 -------
> Gah, you are quite right Mike.  What threw me was that the eol "local mod"
> doesn't show up in status or diff, but that has nothing to do with --force and
> holds true if we simply modify (only) the line endings of any working copy file
> with svn:eol-style set.  Uncertain if that is intentional or not, but this issue
> is certainly invalid.

I can see the rationale for not showing it in status (since it can't be
committed), but I suppose there is a reason to show it --- namely, that
if the file has svn:eol-style=LF but the on-disk file has CRLF line
endings, that might break my build and I'd like the tool to tell me
about it.

I'm leaning to +1 on having 'svn status' _optionally_ report files that
have the wrong eol style on disk.

Thoughts?


> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=463&dsMessageId=2888409
> 
> To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [issues-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org].

Re: [Issue 4070] forced update doesn't correct eols of existing obstructions

Posted by Paul Burba <pt...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 2:41 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cm...@collab.net> wrote:
> On 11/28/2011 02:19 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>> I can see the rationale for not showing it in status (since it can't be
>> committed), but I suppose there is a reason to show it --- namely, that
>> if the file has svn:eol-style=LF but the on-disk file has CRLF line
>> endings, that might break my build and I'd like the tool to tell me
>> about it.
>>
>> I'm leaning to +1 on having 'svn status' _optionally_ report files that
>> have the wrong eol style on disk.
>
> I would never have assumed that 'svn status' *didn't* report such files.
> Have we always had such madness as our default behavior?!

We have, at least as far back as 1.4 (which is the oldest client I
have lying about right now).

> --
> C. Michael Pilato <cm...@collab.net>
> CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand
>
>

Re: [Issue 4070] forced update doesn't correct eols of existing obstructions

Posted by Daniel Shahaf <da...@elego.de>.
Recorded this as
http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4072

C. Michael Pilato wrote on Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 14:41:53 -0500:
> On 11/28/2011 02:19 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > I can see the rationale for not showing it in status (since it can't be
> > committed), but I suppose there is a reason to show it --- namely, that
> > if the file has svn:eol-style=LF but the on-disk file has CRLF line
> > endings, that might break my build and I'd like the tool to tell me
> > about it.
> > 
> > I'm leaning to +1 on having 'svn status' _optionally_ report files that
> > have the wrong eol style on disk.
> 
> I would never have assumed that 'svn status' *didn't* report such files.
> Have we always had such madness as our default behavior?!
> 
> -- 
> C. Michael Pilato <cm...@collab.net>
> CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand
>

Re: [Issue 4070] forced update doesn't correct eols of existing obstructions

Posted by "C. Michael Pilato" <cm...@collab.net>.
On 11/28/2011 02:19 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> I can see the rationale for not showing it in status (since it can't be
> committed), but I suppose there is a reason to show it --- namely, that
> if the file has svn:eol-style=LF but the on-disk file has CRLF line
> endings, that might break my build and I'd like the tool to tell me
> about it.
> 
> I'm leaning to +1 on having 'svn status' _optionally_ report files that
> have the wrong eol style on disk.

I would never have assumed that 'svn status' *didn't* report such files.
Have we always had such madness as our default behavior?!

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cm...@collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand