Hi,

Chris B <chris.blaszczyn...@gmail.com> writes:
[snip]
> - Windows has been able to cope with UNIX line endings a long time; no
> developer is using a default Notepad to open files with high
> expectations. Any Windows development tool and editor worth anything
> I've used is able to handle both just fine.
> - VIM also handles Windows line endings just fine as well. I just
> tested it on a Linux machine. Maybe old version? (pure VI is not even
> on this machine but hard to press these days it can't handle it.)
> - The files in .git folder are in UNIX format anyway, so why are those
> not also included in line ending changes? Isn't is because there is a
> Windows app (msysgit) running on Windows that expects the UNIX line
> ending? So in the same manor, someone might have a Windows system
> using some Cygwin components perhaps, or a Windows C program possibly
> poorly written or just old, that demand some text files to be left
> alone in the format we saved it.

There are several subtleties in LF handling with mixed systems.  Here's
my write-up in:

  https://github.com/mono/mono/blob/master/.gitattributes

for an example set of trade-offs.  Quoting in full since it's fairly short.

- Hari

# CRLF Handling
# -------------
#
# The ideal situation would be to do no EOL normalization.  Each file
# would have a default EOL, and tools on Windows and Linux would handle
# both EOL formats.
#
# We're not in the ideal world.  A popular editor on Windows (possibly
# Visual Studio) silently introduces EOL corruption -- it displays an
# LF-file normally, but any newly added lines have CRLF.  On Linux,
# Emacs and versions of VI handle LF-files and CRLF-files properly.
# However, emacs doesn't like files with both LF and CRLF EOLs.  Editing
# the file without additional action will increase the EOL corruption
# in the file.
#
# Another vector for mixed EOLs is scripts.  We mostly don't have scripts
# that add new lines -- so we rarely see this.  However, one major event
# in the tree was the addition of copyright headers using a script.  That
# script introduced EOL corruption.
#
# Any automated EOL normalization of files already in the repository will
# cause difficulties in traversing histories, assigning blame, etc.  So, we
# don't want to change what's in the repository significantly, even if it
# causes trouble.
#
# What we do now:
#
# a) we ensure that there's no further corruption of LF-files.  So, we use
#    git's 'crlf' attribute on those files to ensure that things are fine
#    when we work on Windows.  We could use 'crlf=input', but it doesn't buy
#    us much -- we might as well be working with consistent EOLs for files in
#    working directories as well as in the repository
#
# b) if the file already of CRLFs, we don't do any normalization.  We use 
'-crlf'
#    so that git doesn't do any EOL-conversion of the file.  As I said, this
#    is mostly harmless on Linux.  We can't mark these files as 'crlf' or use
#    the new (git 1.7.2) 'eol=crlf' attribute, since it changes the contents
#    _inside_ the repository [1], and hence makes history traversal annoying.
#    So, we live with occasional EOL corruption.
#
# c) We can handle mixed-EOL files on a case-by-case basis, converting them to
#    LF- or CRLF-files based on which causes fewer lines to change
#
# d) We try to ensure no further headaches, by declaring EOL normalization on
#    code files, and Unix-flavoured files, like shell-scripts, makefiles, etc.
#
# [1] GIT use LFs as the normalized internal representation.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to