X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" <g DOT r DOT vansickle AT worldnet DOT att DOT net>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: RE: igncr vs text mode mounts, performance vs compatibility
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 22:29:44 -0500
Message-ID: <000601c6f7e5$d3f8b0a0$020aa8c0@DFW5RB41>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; 	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
In-Reply-To: <453EA9C1.8060402@byu.net>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

> From:  Eric Blake
> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 7:03 PM
> Subject: Re: igncr vs text mode mounts, performance vs compatibility
>
> According to Lewis Hyatt on 10/24/2006 12:57 PM:
> > Just a thought, it would probably solve 99% of people's problems if 
> > you just specified that if the first line of the script 
> ends in \r\n, 
> > then \r will be ignored for the rest of the file. Then you 
> would just 
> > need to read the first line a byte at a time, and every subsequent 
> > line could be read efficiently whenever possible, right? 
> And it seems 
> > unlikely that this could possibly break anything.
> 
> Propose a patch, and I will consider it.  In my opinion, it 
> was much easier to do igncr as an all or none option than it 
> was to parse the first line and discard \r on a per-file 
> basis, not to mention that all-or-none is easily configurable 
> so that those of us who WANT literal \r

I'm just curious here: *Why* do you (or anybody else) want bash to not
ignore \r's (or better stated, to only understand The One True Text File
Format (Whatever That Is)(tm))?  I keep trying to figure out what is going
to break when bash suddenly is able to understand \r\n as well as \n, and
keep coming up empty.  Furthermore, I don't recall a single instance of
anybody coming to the list with a problem that was due to bash ignoring \r's
(when it used to do so).

> as required by POSIX 
> can do so.

Is this the reason?  If so, do you know why POSIX requires this?  At some
point POSIX compliance ceased to be a goal of the Cygwin project, so I don't
see that as an argument either way.

-- 
Gary R. Van Sickle


--
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/