Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 14:20:13 -0500
From: Adrian Irving-Beer <wisq-archlist@wisq.net>
To: andreif@mail.dntis.ro
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] tla changes --diffs question
Message-ID: <20041108192013.GA19804@wisq.net>
Mail-Followup-To: andreif@mail.dntis.ro, gnu-arch-users@gnu.org
References: <1099904673.418f36a1ce56a@webmail.dntis.ro>
Mime-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1099904673.418f36a1ce56a@webmail.dntis.ro>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i
Cc: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org
Precedence: list
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2137997599=="
Sender: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org
Errors-To: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org
Status: RO
Content-Length: 2667
Lines: 84

--===============2137997599==
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="+HP7ph2BbKc20aGI"
Content-Disposition: inline


--+HP7ph2BbKc20aGI
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 11:04:33AM +0200, andreif@mail.dntis.ro wrote:

. . .
> because it allows tla 1.2 write in 1.2.1 repositories even though in
> 1.2.1 files are no longer all considered binary and CR LF is
>     modified on commit to LF.
. . .
> Another small problem that I noticed is that tla 1.2 can't access
> 1.2.1 archives completely,

I think there's a misunderstanding here.  I've been scratching my head
reading this thread because I seemed to be getting mixed messages.

Mail from John:

| There is a bug in some of the latest tla-cygwin distributions where
| some of the files get opened in binary mode, and others get opened
| in text mode. So that when it looks at changes, the "original" file
| looks like just LF, while the modified file has CR+LF.

What I'm pretty sure he means here is *not* that 'the latest tla-
cygwin distribution' (see below) has changed its *classification* of
binary files, but that it's accidentally (due to a bug) not always
opening *all* files in 'binary' mode.  In Cygwin, text mode can
involve converting LFs to CRLFs for use by Windows.

| Be careful, as committing with this binary can lead to corrupted
| archives.

This (ouch!) . . .

| I personally have 2 workarounds. First, I reverted to a slightly
| older version of the binaries which seems to not have the problem.
| (I believe this is the 1.2 versus the 1.2.1. If you still had
| problems, I could post a tarball somewhere of what I use.)

. . . and this seem to say to me, "just don't use 1.2.1 on Cygwin".

You can see why I was a little concerned and confused when you said
"for the moment I will stick to 1.2.1"! ;)

--+HP7ph2BbKc20aGI
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBj8bt8ARHrB3FJfkRAk0zAKCz7JuEGMx4e0wmLo5MGbQGLVyPwwCeP9ON
kA5knfmlIaB0AYyH1UDHTLw=
=5Edu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--+HP7ph2BbKc20aGI--


--===============2137997599==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Gnu-arch-users mailing list
Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users

GNU arch home page:
http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
--===============2137997599==--