Re: [PATCH 0/4] Don't warn about missing EOL for symlinks
- From
Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
- Date
- Jun 4, 2010, 14:15 UTC
- Message-ID
- <4C090A84.20209@kdbg.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <20100603170724.GB22779@coredump.intra.peff.net>
Am 03.06.2010 19:07, schrieb Jeff King:
> I don't think "but they should be using plumbing to generate patches" > is the right answer, either. Yes, we expect the diff porcelain to behave > differently depending on configuration, but with the exception of > textconv, it always produces an actual applicable patch.
I don't by into that argument: You have to give --binary if you have changes in binary files. With Michael's patch, you have to give --no-textonv (too). I'm in favor of the patch.
-- Hannes