This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: upload: diffstat-1.40-1, tar-1.15.1-1
- From: "Dave Korn" <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>
- To: <cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 19:22:42 +0100
- Subject: RE: upload: diffstat-1.40-1, tar-1.15.1-1
----Original Message----
>From: Christopher Faylor
>Sent: 17 August 2005 18:20
> Let's apply some common sense here, too. You specify "wt", what would
> you expect? You'd expect a file with CRLF endings, i.e., LF should be
> translated to CRLF.
Well, not on a linux box I wouldn't.
If I open a file in textmode, I expect LF to be translated to CRLF on
systems that use CRLF as their native lineends.
On a pure POSIX system, I would expect no translation and LF endings.
On a pure 'doze system, I would expect translation and CRLF endings.
Cygwin is meant to be emulating a POSIX system. But it's hosted on
windows. That's why we have different mount kinds: they're a way of
specifying what kind of native line-ends you want cygwin to pretend to apps
that the underlying system has.
So I would expect a file opened in binary mode to be written absolutely
verbatim, and I would expect a file written in text mode to be written
verbatim on a binary mount, with POSIX-style LF endings, and I would expect
a file written in text mode on a textmode mound to be translated so that LF
was written to disk as CRLF.
That is to say, I believe that "wt" indicates that \n should be translated
into system-native EOL, and that the mountmode specifies what the
system-native EOL should be considered to be. It's *binary* mode that is
the "programmer's-clearly-specified-intentions-override", and textmode is
the default, not a special postprocessing option.
I think this entire discussion is coming from the wrong perspective!
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....