From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754607AbXKMKS5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 05:18:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751470AbXKMKSt (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 05:18:49 -0500 Received: from hellhawk.shadowen.org ([80.68.90.175]:3340 "EHLO hellhawk.shadowen.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750956AbXKMKSt (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 05:18:49 -0500 Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 10:18:58 +0000 From: Andy Whitcroft To: Mike Frysinger Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: checkpatch.pl and no newline handling Message-ID: <20071113101858.GD12003@shadowen.org> References: <8bd0f97a0711121146w30b88cdcs8abf3f5b6bff2d14@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8bd0f97a0711121146w30b88cdcs8abf3f5b6bff2d14@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 02:46:30PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > the current checkpatch.pl does not reject new files that lack a > newline, yet rejects patches that fix newlines in files ... quite the > opposite of what we actually want Nice. Just what the world needs. I wonder what the heck that format means. Obviously the "corrupt" check is wrong as a "\ No newline" line is valid not corrupt. Now when is "\ No newline" a good thing and when a bad thing. It _looks_ like it is 'bound' to the line before, and if so then its pretty simple. Bad: > +moo > \ No newline at end of file Good: > -moo > \ No newline at end of file /me goes read the source for diff. Sigh. Thanks for the report. -apw