From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] Do not create commits whose message contains NUL Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 02:17:55 -0500 Message-ID: <20111214071755.GA19945@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1323777368-19697-1-git-send-email-pclouds@gmail.com> <20111213175932.GA1663@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: =?utf-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= Duy , git@vger.kernel.org To: Miles Bader X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Dec 14 08:18:04 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Raj6I-0004Qd-Ol for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:18:03 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753006Ab1LNHR6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Dec 2011 02:17:58 -0500 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:49947 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750996Ab1LNHR6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Dec 2011 02:17:58 -0500 Received: (qmail 27526 invoked by uid 107); 14 Dec 2011 07:24:39 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 02:24:39 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 14 Dec 2011 02:17:55 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 02:23:29PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > But maybe it would be nicer to say something like: > > > > error: your commit message contains NUL characters. > > hint: This is often caused by using multibyte encodings such as > > hint: UTF-16. Please check your editor settings. > > I think the error message with the hint is much better for users, but > isn't the term "multibyte" a little misleading here? It seems like > it's really _wide_ encodings that are generally the culprit. Yeah, wide is probably a better term. I'm not sure it is rigorously defined anywhere, but in general I think it refers to the set of encodings that do not care about the embedding of 8-bit ascii bytes as subsets. -Peff