From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?B?VG9yc3RlbiBCw7ZnZXJzaGF1c2Vu?= Subject: Re: 'eol' documentation confusion Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 08:26:58 +0200 Message-ID: <5587AAB2.80305@web.de> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Robert Dailey , Git X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jun 22 08:28:09 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Z6vDF-00009s-5B for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 08:28:09 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933033AbbFVG1y (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2015 02:27:54 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.3]:56386 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932992AbbFVG1j (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2015 02:27:39 -0400 Received: from [192.168.88.199] ([194.47.243.242]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb002) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MEVQ1-1ZM1Mf0JKL-00Fn75; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 08:27:36 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.7.0 In-Reply-To: X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:OH859zgK24v34HCNltVGwXuiOc7Tb2fbE69uJ6jEUTTnujiI0nH jL2bnrX8ub7jZ0HrNclD9ylXkL84K51Lc08mjVSsatFa0mVP4HXPDY67vIYJhOb5f3b9mr2 LuQVPA1Q46javihW4N3is7FxDU+XWih8XgrEawgYNC8yHIn3h2sOTRRK2a+AXwawNTflkPe 2LRUDsz1VBalG+AToSpUg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 06/21/2015 04:16 PM, Robert Dailey wrote: > On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Robert Dailey wrote: >> Upon inspection of the gitattributes documentation page here: >> https://git-scm.com/docs/gitattributes >> >> When comparing the documentation for 'text' with 'eol', I see the >> following missing explanations for 'eol': >> >> * eol >> * -eol >> >> Maybe the fact that these are missing means they are not valid to use. >> There is also the issue that `text` usually controls EOL anyway. Is >> there ever any reason to set eol in a way differently than explained >> in the documentation (that is, `eol=lf` or `eol=crlf`)? No. eol=lf or eol=crlf are the only useful settings. Everything else is ignored because it does not make sense. See convert.c: static enum eol git_path_check_eol()