similar to: Problem with svn:eol-style

Hi all, TL;DR - should we recommend core.autocrlf=input instead of core.autocrlf=false on Windows? I recently switched from doing pre-commit builds and tests from my Ubuntu VM, to my Windows machine where I do all my development. I was aware that line endings is an issue, so made sure to set core.autocrlf=false as directed in the Getting Started guide (see

Right, my understanding is that files that specifically need CRLF should say so via .gitattributes somewhere. autocrlf=false ought to work if your Windows editor doesn’t (or can be persuaded not to) introduce CRLFs. I’ve observed that the Visual Studio editor will detect the line-ending style of the file you’re editing, and imitate it. This works great until you create a new file. 😝 So I’ve

Hello All, R 2.11.1 Windows XP, 32-bit Help says that default is eol=''\n''. To me, that represents Linefeed (LF) >From Help: eol the character(s) to print at the end of each line (row). For example, eol="\r\n" will produce Windows'' line endings on a Unix-alike OS, and eol="\r" will produce files as expected by Mac OS Excel 2004. I would

On 12 September 2017 at 15:29, Alan McKay <alan.mckay at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi folks, > > I have been googling for a few weeks now and not finding anything. > Apache 2.2 is EOL at the end of this year. > > Has Red Hat announced a plan yet on what they are doing in RHEL6? > > I am assuming they will up-version from 6.9 to 6.10 and as part of > that upgrade from

I'm curious about the estimated EoL date on 6.2-RELEASE. Current estimate is listed as Jan 31 2008. That's just about 5 months away now. Suggestions for those who are about to be EoL'ed? Thanks.

Dear R developers, I am developing an R package which returns strings with new line codes. I am not sure if I should use "\r\n" or "\n" in my returned strings on Windows platforms. What is the recommended best practice for package developers (and code in base R) for coding new lines in strings? And just out of curiosity: What is the reason (or history) for preferring

Colleagues, I am using R 2.7.2 on all three platforms (OS X; Windows; Linux) and I have encountered the following problem: I use R to issue a system call the execute a command in the OS. For example: system("DOSOMETHING TOSOMEFILE") In most situations, this task completes successfully and control returns to R. However, in rare situations, the target file (TOSOMEFILE) is

I was trying, on a Linux system, to get a .Rbuildignore file to work. After far too long, I found the problem was the <CR><NL> line endings in the .Rbuildignore file -- I had originally created it on a Windows system, and emacs in Ubuntu was politely hiding that fact from me. The patterns didn't work to exclude files because it was trying to match filenames to patterns like

I''m trying to write a story for a Rails app which involves using the attachment_fu plugin to upload images. After blunting my pick on this for a while, google found me this: http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/134743#600831 So it seems that there''s a hole in Rails integration testing and multipart form posting. David offered to incorporate a patch to story runner at the end of the

Can anyone answer if we will get zfs de-duplication before SXCE EOL? If possible also anser the same on encryption? Thanks -- This message posted from opensolaris.org

[This email is either empty or too large to be displayed at this time]

Dear R users, When dumping an R matrix object into a file -- typically via the 'write.table' function -- the 'eol' option can be used to specify the end-of-line character(s) which should appear at the end of each row. However the argument to 'eol' seems to be restricted to have length 1, whereas ideally I would like different rows to be written to file each with its own

Hello everyone, recently I've found something I consider a bug. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I always thought that Linux' EOL is 0x0A. Imagine my surprise when I saw that all messages that are being output on to the stderr (on any Linux I've tested - Fedora and Ubuntu) are terminated with 0x0D, 0x0A. Maybe that's standard behaviour of all stderr messages in all Linux

Hi folks, I have been googling for a few weeks now and not finding anything. Apache 2.2 is EOL at the end of this year. Has Red Hat announced a plan yet on what they are doing in RHEL6? I am assuming they will up-version from 6.9 to 6.10 and as part of that upgrade from Apache 2.2 to Apache 2.4 ? thanks, -Alan -- "You should sit in nature for 20 minutes a day. Unless you are busy, then

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, With now release 5 and below all EOL for over 12 months[1]. What guidelines/policy is in place for removal of old and out of date content from the wiki? [1] 5 is in extended support upstream and documentation etc. remain available until November 30, 2020. Should 5 related content remain until that date? Regards Phil - -- *** If this is a

Hi Everyone, Do we have an EOL date for version 3.6? I was looking into the Release Planning wiki and EOL is not yet defined. Thank you, Lester

Hi, I've checked all the docs I can find and this top icisn't mentioned, so I'm guessing there is no such thing, but I have users who swear that VisionFS used to automatically convert unix text files to windows text files (change the EOL to have both a carriage return and a newline, instead of just a newline). I think the user is mistaken, but just wanted to check. Is there a way

Is there any reason why releases have EoL dates after only 12 months? While it's clear that some sort of EoL is important, I can't think of any security advisories recently which weren't accompanied by patches for all the security branches, even those which are no longer officially supported. Colin Percival

Hi, I am very sorry to do this on short notice, but obviously Meltdown and Spectre are a lot more than anyone was really expecting to come down the pipeline. Xen 4.4 has been EOL upstream for about a year now and I have personally been reviewing and backporting patches based on the 4.5 versions made available upstream. Given that 4.5 is now also reaching EOL, backporting to 4.4 will become

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 06:13:42PM +0200, hw wrote: > What?s the point of doing this with Fedora? It?s not like bugs > were fixed before Fedora is EOL and all reports are forgotten. Many bugs are fixed in Fedora. Many more bugs are fixed in the upstreams. Please remember that Fedora is primarily an *integration* project, and the best way to get bugs fixed is for the developers of the code