From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23047 invoked by alias); 10 Aug 2017 12:04:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 20281 invoked by uid 89); 10 Aug 2017 12:04:27 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=apologize, claims, website, telling X-HELO: mail-it0-f48.google.com Received: from mail-it0-f48.google.com (HELO mail-it0-f48.google.com) (209.85.214.48) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 12:04:25 +0000 Received: by mail-it0-f48.google.com with SMTP id f16so14819369itb.0 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 05:04:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=42rbWvPpeUCOH1SiiOdMsze93YOQo47AZ6vOx+97oBk=; b=jC7q2FfYK/JCaNrV1duECsOzS/7M+ATw8xg/jw4q7UV2nG8JA9dor+F1iH51ERxIxo AOvmF+t7735PwAT0A4qUaER5Z1NVpVPISZi8VXSOnbBIy8mT4951/vzjmzzdmwGCXw0m 95uhXkX1XR7ovvyFkPOkzU66w5InNKCaZ6kva6OPbary9aZqnVB5KPT9nnE0POazpOmP 4VDS9bqXiCEH3V7nQjGKhA1GMqlSkUY/8pRZgezgM+frthmFUInoOmLZtahTElkmT12U 1BtbmB6iLO75rfmBkElRkppRYAWDcgPY2FbmSUN7x1ass5c5Ns8ow3S3ZaYjiB4ccRxC yX8Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw113Fbx+q4s7OaP4TxIK/3TTCKDCe+DhiZaKlo7gINOhwQLEd+v1v Y3tQ66IUQ0yly7SK X-Received: by 10.36.124.75 with SMTP id a72mr9470094itd.41.1502366663394; Thu, 10 Aug 2017 05:04:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.6] (d4-50-42-50.try.wideopenwest.com. [50.4.50.42]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l62sm3106942ita.8.2017.08.10.05.04.22 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 10 Aug 2017 05:04:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: gawk 4.1.4: CR separate char for CRLF files To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <004401d3109c$2dcb09e0$89611da0$@gmx.net> <598a47fc.5501ca0a.5476f.0305@mx.google.com> <004701d310a9$372363e0$a56a2ba0$@gmx.net> <001001d310ea$ceeee230$6ccca690$@gmx.net> <391b0ca2-e495-a908-160a-6d95492f526f@redhat.com> <9d387108-05c5-7e47-35af-62fc8a43c89f@redhat.com> From: cyg Simple Message-ID: Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 12:04:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9d387108-05c5-7e47-35af-62fc8a43c89f@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-08/txt/msg00102.txt.bz2 On 8/9/2017 3:09 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 08/09/2017 06:03 AM, Eric Blake wrote: >> On 08/09/2017 03:37 AM, Jannick wrote: >> >>> Which is a pretty much of a pain when there is no easy fallback solution >>> provided in case a major change is applied. > ... >>> This is - to say the least - unpleasant in the light of what Cygwin claims >>> to be, namely 'a large collection of GNU and Open Source tools which provide >>> functionality similar to a Linux distribution on Windows' (from the top of >>> the start website www.cygwin.com). >> >> On Linux, nothing strips CR automatically. So on Cygwin, we behave the >> same - nothing strips CR automatically on binary mounted data. >> >> And the fact that the change was made AND ANNOUNCED back in February, >> but you are now only 6 months later complaining about it, is telling. > > It was pointed out to me off-list that my reply can easily be mis-read > in a much more negative tone than I intended, so I'm apologizing for > coming across as mean (yes, I know, https://cygwin.com/acronyms/#WJM). > I think I was trying to emphasize that complaints about the behavior > change at the time of the change were expected (and there was indeed a > reaction, although I was pleasantly surprised at the time that it was > limited to just a few threads, so apparently not many people were > negatively impacted - and that's a good thing). But complaints about > the behavior after six months are a bit unexpected. But I guess not > everyone keeps their software up-to-date on quite as frequent a > schedule, so I shouldn't have been as surprised or reacted as harshly. > I don't think you need to apologize, in fact your post stopped me from posting similarly. > At any rate, my advice continues to be the same: how would you deal with > CRLF on a Linux system? That's the ideal way to also deal with it on > Cygwin (we used to have gratuitous incompatibilities between the systems > where the same command line on Linux did not have the same result as on > Cygwin; but the change back in February was to get rid of those > incompatibilities, even if it breaks scripts that were unwisely relying > on the incompatibilities). > The clue here is, does it only work for this type of OS? If yes then it isn't portable anyway but should it be? And does it only work on this type of OS because of an issue that could change as a result of a fix. Cygwin has always been and will always be a work in progress. The rule of thumb "does it work on Linux" should be applied to all that you do with Cygwin. If it only works on Cygwin and not on Linux then the chances are, something will change. -- cyg Simple -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple