Re: Windows Line Endings

[Peter Rosin]

On 2012-10-08 23:29, Roumen Petrov wrote:
> Peter Rosin wrote:
>> Hi Roumen,
>>
>> On 2012-10-07 11:37, Roumen Petrov wrote:
>>> And now test fail in cross environment : linux for mingw host
>> Thanks for the report!
>>
>> I have pushed this. Let me know if it doesn't help.
> 
> No comment.

Thank you, I'm assuming it finally works for everybody.

> Ralf wrote so good code I cannot understand any Peter's  patches.
> Why you just don not use existing working fine macros ?

Please, make a useful suggestion instead of hand-waving it like
that. What working macros should I use? I also don't see where I'm
introducing any new macros, can you please point that out for me?
And Ralf must write very special code indeed if his code somehow
makes it impossible for some to read the code others write.
[Ralf, if you're reading this, I hope you understand that I don't
think that's true, you write very good code, period]


In this particular case,

        LT_AT_HOST_DATA([expout],

doesn't work as it creates \r\n newlines in expout, and $EGREP futzes
the newlines on MSYS so that the standard output ends up \n, causing
the test to blow up.

        AT_HOST([expout],

doesn't work as $EGREP leaves the newlines alone for Linux->MinGW
(at least that's what I deduced from your report), and then you
have \n in expout and \r\n in standard output. And the test blows up.

Either that, or I misread your "And now test fail in cross
environment : linux for mingw host" message. I read it as if the
test worked without my patch changing LT_AT_HOST_DATA to AT_HOST,
and that the test failed with the patch. That message made me
assume that neither LT_AT_HOST_DATA nor AT_DATA works for this
test (and the only thing different in this test is that $EGREP
is used).

So, the newlines has to be normalized after the $EGREP, or the
test has to be rewritten in a deeper way.

And, as it happens, Ralf did not write the code I'm changing here,
it was written by Gary when he thankfully eradicated the legacy
testsuite, so I'm not sure why you're dragging Ralf into this?

Cheers,
Peter