1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. LINUX.DEBIAN.DEVEL.MENTOR

  • CRLF in upstream source code

    From Lourisvaldo Figueredo Junior@21:1/5 to Debian Mentors on Mon Mar 14 12:25:53 2022
    Hi everyone,

    I have a doubt. In cases where the upstream uses the MS-DOS pattern CRLF ("\r\n") to end of line, instead Unix pattern LF ("\n").
    In this situation, should the maintainer make a patch converting this files to the Unix pattern LF?
    Or to Debian is 'acceptable' to build a package from source keeping the MS-DOS pattern CRLF?
    The question is about the upstream source code, not to the debian directory.

    Thank so much.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEFuBtIUgnpVtyoYYgJG4R6zlTL6QFAmIvXoEACgkQJG4R6zlT L6RalQ/7BBnXJVr1HLSvckShxm/1GklHJGdoE7o7qdao39KQR7FoKSMIjROBZIz0 VOe75QM5nwOg8XHICVjAxL6WXbncO0+R9hUPHtuIQ5ebJ1Ekk0ZZx/rKrAohDquh LJh4Gnf875uJPyo2yBYPnloDV+2ayMkypxH8/C+3setQGK5u3hEz0hlh7GVP2t1u pzB21+v78bJlpp7+OzTywYCnpjd/fdOY+gFI0zeI1f38CAZACP5yrv0wrCGoEF/m ChXD8TbZQ90Ht05f+ZyvjPHb7FtBEdj9cskLb6I6A14v9QeDl9YARbrjJpetKDuA //EHxhH2T6d0hsKas5jFwnRpeOiYf3wlQ1IUknd3o8EuohTbuuK3lP7pAyOhueNC BHEXUKBrNoO5yZcBIS4NuU8QlOn26gmtt6x5u4nL0DibxgpQsGUkK6o3V6931x1p OHFICAjaHw1zO/UaKpLYUDxkdOB0T/4sWQdo6k4EKo/pfcBIzrtgvf/WBtM0ajE0 yYzgPNbwYCaSKN/dwvkeE71VR82inmTQweRECa9kU7ERhiU9f4eUyhJn+HJ8Zpah J0HqSIKu4NU/KQOPIcJiQbMmN/W6KU8EMhU2KuS8uwdj3lXyyZnkuR1JoAzVLhwB M5y9JS8ib0wMukBp18kdYEugUBCHScimYeVGYLyiYzAl0quR1lU=
    =Buq5
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Andrey Rahmatullin@21:1/5 to Lourisvaldo Figueredo Junior on Mon Mar 14 17:00:01 2022
    On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 12:25:53PM -0300, Lourisvaldo Figueredo Junior wrote:
    I have a doubt. In cases where the upstream uses the MS-DOS pattern CRLF ("\r\n") to end of line, instead Unix pattern LF ("\n").
    In this situation, should the maintainer make a patch converting this files to
    the Unix pattern LF?
    No.

    Or to Debian is 'acceptable' to build a package from source keeping the MS-DOS
    pattern CRLF?
    Why should it matter to anything, including Debian, unless there are
    technical problems caused by that?

    --
    WBR, wRAR

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQJhBAABCgBLFiEEolIP6gqGcKZh3YxVM2L3AxpJkuEFAmIvZHstFIAAAAAAFQAP cGthLWFkZHJlc3NAZ251cGcub3Jnd3JhckBkZWJpYW4ub3JnAAoJEDNi9wMaSZLh PlYP/1BBfkNvtMTfU6L2TjouS9uOK4u7HFdCl7gdaA6K8RxqUj27BgMSYZsqu0Nx dznn07mj7mmnQclb0lhuUbY7MUYkgfxfef/iNsB2/W65h8Dsow/3fuZxHfV4fFjp WM2Mhc2R7H5S8Gn6eE6s18yPOEDVA0hvTMpTifgDdLAzcEw456A0bigavs1rlNcS x7mWgU1acSFKd59IOzMssnvENUoV0p7UWSl037mpBueni+SLMr417jwctb9tz8Sy lhx/SNE8r+oTn7OEYCRck0KyunoJLGD2YoH2ny0CTyJcX5gr40+2UXJCL8g1q8lC j/23Nke4445mcMZAeSjW23pjVjdZqAWe3ov/1qpK/fCEHRNxbIZGZyzmXeNKj+Wf EVzKJyGS47HpsE6DO3M3gg9h3VLbaUabO3Lj2nYsbKr++w1uwMDMKxEZbw3zWCBV T7/lFv+O34zAmBSQ2RrvF4eWqaK/fCWz+myUT1EEx1sTJfSVIxF9v88Xbou7PHGj ilpxt8mwwi33x7uKUwm85J0bYSzyuYyQLVbnF5BGBC+TY3BKlijSeAGP8fxaPSEl oVvJG194gS00/4DD7sT+E4/+x8S+UMGe6JkgXd6QNE/o33tGVpR6rjwYsuMIa8Ms dlfYzuhbHCJlgOTGrJtl8IUPgNhUqDgaYn6wFq5/SaDyzRyw
    =UHTt
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Geert Stappers@21:1/5 to Andrey Rahmatullin on Mon Mar 14 17:20:01 2022
    On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 08:51:27PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
    On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 12:25:53PM -0300, Lourisvaldo Figueredo Junior wrote:
    I have a doubt. In cases where the upstream uses the MS-DOS pattern CRLF ("\r\n") to end of line, instead Unix pattern LF ("\n").
    In this situation, should the maintainer make a patch converting this files to
    the Unix pattern LF?
    No.

    Or to Debian is 'acceptable' to build a package from source keeping the MS-DOS
    pattern CRLF?
    Why should it matter to anything, including Debian, unless there are technical problems caused by that?

    So such as not compiling. Or another reason not yet shared with us.


    The question is about the upstream source code, not to the debian directory.
    As Andrey says: No need to change CRLF end of line into a LF e.o.l.
    Still feel free to express what you deem a valid reason to change the EOL


    Thank so much.

    Thank you for reaching out to [email protected].


    Groeten
    Geert Stappers
    --
    Silence is hard to parse

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From [email protected]@21:1/5 to All on Tue Mar 15 17:30:01 2022
    Why should it matter to anything, including Debian, unless there are technical problems caused by that?

    So such as not compiling. Or another reason not yet shared with us.


    No problem with building the package. I just saw a comment on a bug and I was in doubt [1].
    I decided to ask first. I'm a complete novice and I'm trying to make things right.
    Thank you Andrey and Geert.

    [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=698359#10

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Eriberto Mota@21:1/5 to All on Tue Mar 15 20:40:01 2022
    Em ter., 15 de mar. de 2022 às 13:29, <[email protected]> escreveu:

    Why should it matter to anything, including Debian, unless there are technical problems caused by that?

    So such as not compiling. Or another reason not yet shared with us.


    No problem with building the package. I just saw a comment on a bug and I was in doubt [1].
    I decided to ask first. I'm a complete novice and I'm trying to make things right.
    Thank you Andrey and Geert.

    [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=698359#10

    Note that the current source code in Github dropped the CRLF in
    several files. To compare the old version with the current version via
    diff, in a separate directory, you could use dos2unix. In src/, the
    command "file *" will help to see all files using CRLF. This procedure
    is a workaround for 698359#10.

    Regards,

    Eriberto

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)