Re: [PATCH 2/2] docs: correct documentation about eol attribute

From: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Date: Jan 11, 2022, 22:40 UTC
Message-ID: <Yd4Hb/bxvJZkJP7P@camp.crustytoothpaste.net>
In-Reply-To: <20220111183003.g4fch5d2f47it2hg@tb-raspi4>

On 2022-01-11 at 18:30:03, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

> Hej Brian,
> thanks for digging into this.
> 
> Could you be so kind to send the stackoverflow issue ?
> (You can send it to me only)

I'll just post it here publicly, since I think there's value to folks seeing what questions users have:

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/70633469/what-is-the-difference-between-text-auto-and-text-auto-eol-lf/70636508?

Show 15 quoted lines

> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 02:15:07AM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:
> >  Note that setting this attribute on paths which
> > +are in the index with CRLF line endings may make the paths to be
> > +considered dirty. Adding the path to the index again will normalize the
> > +line endings in the index.
> 
> I think that this can be loosened as well. And, beside this, the "dirty"
> warning about setting attributes could be written as part of the "text"
> attribute as well. I dunno. Here is a possible suggestion:
> 
> 
>   Note that setting this attribute on paths which are in the index with CRLF
>   line endings may make the paths to be considered dirty - unless "text=auto"
>   is set. `git ls-files --eol` can be used to check the "line ending status".
>   Adding the path to the index again will normalize the line endings in the index.

I'm not sure that's correct, though. The problem is if the file is detected as text, which it might well be if text=auto is set. Or am I not understanding something correctly?

-- 
brian m. carlson (he/him or they/them)
Toronto, Ontario, CA