From: Alexey Shumkin Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 13:18:44 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] pretty: user format ignores i18n.logOutputEncoding setting Message-ID: <20110726171844.68b6e8ff@ashu.dyn.rarus.ru> In-Reply-To: <7vwrf6qh49.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> В Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:45:26 -0700 Junio C Hamano пишет: > Alexey Shumkin writes: > > > git log --graph --oneline > > and > > git log --graph --pretty=format:'%C(yellow)%h %Creset%s' > > give different outputs on Linux UTF-8 console > > when commit messages contain non-UTF-8 characters > > (content) "different" is not specific enough to describe a problem (in > some cases, difference in command line arguments is the way to obtain > different results), especially if you do not state that they "should" > be the same to begin with, and preferrably under what condition they > should be the same. Ok, I'll fix the description > (content) Do you really need all of the above options to observe the > breakage, or can you drop --graph? If so, drop it from the proposed > commit log message, as it is distracting without merit. You're right. I do not. I just observed the error with such parameters, so I wrote them, but they are not neccessary for the error appearance. > (content) Do you really mean SP before %Creset, not after? Realy do, but it does not matter here > (style) Somehow I find this hard to read. Perhaps make the two "sample > commands" stand out more from the surrounding text? E.g. > > -- >8 -- > The following two ought to give the same output to a terminal: > > $ git log --oneline > $ git log --pretty=format:'%C(yellow)%h %creset%s' > > However, the former pays attention to i18n.logOutputEncoding > configuration, while the latter does not when it format "%s". A log > messages written in an encoding i18n.commitEncoding that is not UTF-8 > is shown corrupted with the latter even when i18n.logOutputEncoding > is set to convert to UTF-8. > > Signed-off-by: ... > -- 8< -- I'm sorry. I'm newbie in a patch distribution and collaborative work on Enlgish (it is not my native language). So thanks for the correction. > (question) Does this change affect other commands, most notably > format-patch, and if so how? I'll discover this, thanks for pointing me a direction.