From: "Torsten Bögershausen" <tboegi@web.de>
To: "Michael Haggerty" <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>,
"Torsten Bögershausen" <tboegi@web.de>,
"Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git discussion list <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Surprising interaction of "binary" and "eol" gitattributes
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 21:26:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54FF5376.7070500@web.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54FF450F.7040506@alum.mit.edu>
On 10.03.15 20:25, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> On 03/06/2015 10:30 PM, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
>>
>>> Oops, I misunderstood an internal bug report. In seems that it is the
>>> following scenario that is incorrect:
>>>
>>> *.png text=auto eol=crlf
>> Hm, I don't know if we support this combination at all.
>
> The user can specify this combination in a .gitattributes file and we
> have to react to it *some way*. Theoretically we could document that
> this combination is undefined and/or emit an error if we see this
> combination, but we don't do so.
>
>> The current logic supports auto-detection of text/binary,
>> * text=auto
>> (the files will get the line ending from core.eol or core.autocrlf)
>>
>> or the the setting of a line ending:
>> *.sh eol=lf
>> *.bat eol=crlf
>>
>>
>> Is there a special use-case, which needs the combination of both ?
>
> I'm still trying to infer the spirit of the current behavior, so caveats
> here.
>
> This comes from a real-life scenario where a user, somewhere early in
> .gitattributes, had
>
> * text
> * eol=crlf
>
> and then later (this could be in a subdirectory) tried to carve out
> exceptions to this rule by using
>
> *.png binary
> * text=auto
Hm,
I can see 2 problems here:
the "binary" attribute does not exist at all.
I sometimes which we had it, but we don't.
There is "text" and "-text", and that is it.
The other problem is the order of the lines, which is fully
intuitive for each person who has ever written a "matching parser".
The parser matches each file namr on it's own, depending on the matching:
*.png -text
* text=auto
means that all png files are binary, and ALL files are "auto".
Guess what happens to the png's ?
The second rule wins, as it is the last rule processed.
git check-attr text *
A.png: text: auto
B.txt: text: auto
---
If we reverse the order in .gitattributes, things look better:
* text=auto
*.png -text
git check-attr text *
A.png: text: unset
B.txt: text: auto
--------------------
This is not very intuitive or even surprising, at least for many people.
Unless I mis-understand the problem, it may be that the documentation may be updated ?
The general rule for writing .gitattributes
is to specify the "wider" rules first, and then the more specific rules after that.
It could be that
Documentation/gitattributes.txt
should mention this instead:
------------------------
* -text
*.txt text
*.vcproj eol=crlf
*.sh eol=lf
------------------------
The other thing is to promote/mention the command
"git check-attr text *"
at a prominent place.
> Intuitively it *feels* like either of the later lines should suppress
> EOL translation in PNG files (assuming the PNG file has a NUL byte in
> the first 8k, which this one did).
>
> It seems to me that setting "text=auto" should mean that Git uses its
> heuristic to guess whether a particular file is text or not, and then
> treats the file as if it had "text" or "-text" set. If the latter, then
> EOL translation should be suppressed.
>
> It also seems to me that "binary" should imply "-eol".
>
> Michael
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-10 20:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-05 16:38 Surprising interaction of "binary" and "eol" gitattributes Michael Haggerty
2015-03-05 20:49 ` Torsten Bögershausen
2015-03-05 22:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-06 5:59 ` Torsten Bögershausen
2015-03-06 17:51 ` Michael Haggerty
2015-03-06 21:30 ` Torsten Bögershausen
2015-03-10 19:25 ` Michael Haggerty
2015-03-10 20:01 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-10 22:16 ` Michael Haggerty
2015-03-10 22:54 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-11 5:54 ` Torsten Bögershausen
2015-03-11 17:59 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-11 20:30 ` Johannes Sixt
2015-03-11 21:31 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-11 21:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-10 20:26 ` Torsten Bögershausen [this message]
2015-03-10 22:24 ` Michael Haggerty
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=54FF5376.7070500@web.de \
--to=tboegi@web.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.