Re: [PATCH v8 10/10] ce_compare_data() did not respect conversion
- From
Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de>
- Date
- May 4, 2016, 04:07 UTC
- Message-ID
- <57297579.6060805@web.de>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqbn4nngci.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
On 05/03/2016 08:31 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 7 quoted lines
> Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de> writes: > >> This will probably take some time, so that's why I asked if 1/10..4/10 could >> proceed as is ? > Sure, I wasn't saying 1-4 looked wrong at all. I was wondering why > the ones in the middle, especially 7, shouldn't be moved forward > together with them.
The main reason is, that 7 breaks t6038 under Windows. (And I discovered that too late :-( And as Windows is the platform being most interested in CRLF handling, I need to re-do some work.