Mail Archives: cygwin/2004/04/03/23:46:03
Charles Wilson wrote:
[...]
> (2) it's an attempt to prevent users from permanently scrogging binary
> files. See: d2u, on a binary file, is an irreversible operation. So,
> if you do "d2u *" you'll probably kill something deep inside some binary
> file, and you can't fix it -- unless some minimal safeguards are in place.
>
> u2d MAY be reversible -- IF there were no pre-exising \r\n
> combinations in the file to begin with -- so when (OMG-fixit-)d2u is
> run, obviously the first '\n' is preceeded by a (newly-added) '\r\n', so
> the prog merrily replaces ALL '\r\n' with '\n'...which MAY fix your
> oops, but maybe not.
>
>
> So, with the current code, if you snarf the first "line" -- all chars
> until the first '\n' -- if it's a binary file the odds are pretty low
> that the immediately-preceeding character is a '\r' -- so d2u as
> currently coded will bail out, and no harm is done.
>
> It doesn't work so well in the other direction -- by the same logic
> above, you'll almost never bail out early if you run 'u2d' on a binary
> file -- but if you immediately do a 'd2u' you MIGHT be able to recover.)
>
[...]
If detection of binary files is desirable, why not use an explicit test with a
more robust methodology? GNU grep detects binary files by looking for a '\0'
byte. Such a test could be used by both d2u and u2d; they could bail out with a
message like "skipping binary file".
Cheers
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -