From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: decode_eol and inconsistent EOL
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 22:13:39 +0300
Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
Message-ID: <9743-Mon29Apr2002221339+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1020429074608.22112B-100000@is> <200204291840.g3TIe7306365@aztec.santafe.edu>
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1020107791 9211 127.0.0.1 (29 Apr 2002 19:16:31 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 19:16:31 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: gildea@stop.mail-abuse.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, akochoi@shaw.ca
Return-path: <emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian))
	id 172GdT-0002OS-00
	for <emacs-devel@main.gmane.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2002 21:16:31 +0200
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 172GhM-0005s1-00
	for <emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2002 21:20:33 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian))
	id 172GdD-0003EU-00; Mon, 29 Apr 2002 15:16:15 -0400
Original-Received: from freya.inter.net.il ([192.114.186.14])
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian))
	id 172Gb7-00031f-00; Mon, 29 Apr 2002 15:14:06 -0400
Original-Received: from Zaretsky ([80.230.2.40])
	by freya.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 2.9.3.2)
	with ESMTP id BJM90656;
	Mon, 29 Apr 2002 22:14:01 +0300 (IDT)
Original-To: rms@gnu.org
X-Mailer: emacs 21.2.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-Reply-To: <200204291840.g3TIe7306365@aztec.santafe.edu> (message from
	Richard Stallman on Mon, 29 Apr 2002 12:40:07 -0600 (MDT))
Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Emacs development discussions. <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel/>
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:3425
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:3425

> Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 12:40:07 -0600 (MDT)
> From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
> 
>     Basically, we are talking about two possible classes of cases here:
> 
>       - binary files
> 
>       - text files produced by broken programs
> 
>     In the first case, what Emacs does now is the Right Thing.
> 
> Would the other behavior really be much less right,
> in the case of a binary file?

The other behavior inhibits all EOL conversions, so it shows the
contents of a binary file's more accurately.  That's not an
overwhelming advantage, but I don't see any significant advantages in
the suggested change, either.  In the absence of significant
advantages, I think the defaults should not change.