On 06/10/2011 20:41, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
rem check setting - yes, input:
git config --global core.autocrlf
input
The Git installation under Windows set mine to true (not input).
So while it could be used, I'd have to remember to run unix2dos over it
- that is, if people expect a
On 7-10-2011 9:15, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 06/10/2011 20:41, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
The Git installation under Windows set mine to true (not input).
true it is, see other message ;)
So while it could be used, I'd have to remember to run unix2dos over it
- that is, if people expect a
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
So while it could be used, I'd have to remember to run unix2dos over it
- that is, if people expect a Windows patch (
I don't think that is needed. I believe the 'patch' program will sort
that out by itself. I have sent numerous patches to
On 7-10-2011 9:15, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
I don't think that is needed. I believe the 'patch' program will sort
that out by itself. I have sent numerous patches to FPC and Lazarus
(both those repositories are git ones on my Linux system). Nobody has
ever complained that the EOL style was
On 07/10/2011 11:28, Marco van de Voort wrote:
Even up to date patch doesn't always process lineendings properly btw. I
have to dos2unix often on *nix too.
Interesting. I would think sharing code between platform with patches is
a bog-standard task these days, and all tools in question should
On 07/10/2011 12:52, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
doesn't work - will need patch -p1 git.diff
Correct, and anybody that has applied a handful of patches or more in
there time would have known that already. ;-)
Regards,
- Graeme -
--
fpGUI Toolkit - a cross-platform GUI toolkit using Free
On 7-10-2011 15:13, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 07/10/2011 12:52, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
doesn't work - will need patch -p1 git.diff
Correct, and anybody that has applied a handful of patches or more in
there time would have known that already. ;-)
Sure, but why add to the aggravation -
On 07/10/2011 15:53, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
Sure, but why add to the aggravation - SVN diff doesn't do this, so one
less difference to worry about:
It's still in the universal patch format, with or without the path
prefixes. Also nobody should commit a patch blindly. They should review
the
On 07/10/2011 14:53, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
On 7-10-2011 15:13, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 07/10/2011 12:52, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
doesn't work - will need patch -p1 git.diff
Correct, and anybody that has applied a handful of patches or more in
there time would have known that
On 7-10-2011 16:08, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
On 07/10/2011 15:53, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
Sure, but why add to the aggravation - SVN diff doesn't do this, so one
less difference to worry about:
It's still in the universal patch format, with or without the path
prefixes. Also nobody should
Am 07.10.2011 11:28, schrieb Marco van de Voort:
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
So while it could be used, I'd have to remember to run unix2dos over it
- that is, if people expect a Windows patch (
I don't think that is needed. I believe the 'patch' program will sort
that
Am 07.10.2011 16:08, schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
On 07/10/2011 15:53, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
Sure, but why add to the aggravation - SVN diff doesn't do this, so one
less difference to worry about:
It's still in the universal patch format, with or without the path
prefixes. Also nobody
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
Even up to date patch doesn't always process lineendings properly btw. I
have to dos2unix often on *nix too.
Interesting. I would think sharing code between platform with patches is
a bog-standard task these days, and all tools in question
On 07.10.2011 20:44, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
Am 07.10.2011 11:28, schrieb Marco van de Voort:
In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
So while it could be used, I'd have to remember to run unix2dos over it
- that is, if people expect a Windows patch (
I don't think that is needed. I
14 matches
Mail list logo
