Re: [PATCH] Fix crlf attribute handling to match documentation
- From
- Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 19, 2007, 09:58 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200705191058.32473.andyparkins@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7v646p4r50.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
On Saturday 2007, May 19, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> The check you modified in the first hunk is not the above '<=' > comparison but is this:
I was talking about the second hunk there though, which I mentioned with "...skipped in crlf_to_worktree()...". In which case the description matches.
Show 7 quoted lines
> (action == CRLF_GUESS && !auto_crlf) > > and "core.autocrlf = input" makes "auto_crlf = -1", so when > action is not GUESS, or even when action is GUESS, if the config > is set to "input", the if() statement you patched in the first > hunk should not trigger. The above description is different from > what the code was doing.
As I say, the description was for the second hunk.
The fault was my last paragraph, "Similarly for crlf_to_worktree(), if core.autocrlf is false, no", which should have said "Similarly for crlf_to_git()". Sorry.
With that small change I think my description was correct. However, it obviously wasn't clear - apologies.
Andy
-- Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIET andyparkins@gmail.com