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.bugs
Subject: Re: decode_eol and inconsistent EOL
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 21:00:32 +0300
Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-admin@gnu.org
Message-ID: <3405-Mon29Apr2002210031+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1020429074505.22112A-100000@is> <200204291259.g3TCxi119424@rum.cs.yale.edu>
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1020103439 32327 127.0.0.1 (29 Apr 2002 18:03:59 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 18:03:59 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: gnu-emacs-bug@gnu.org
Return-path: <bug-gnu-emacs-admin@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian))
	id 172FVG-0008PG-00
	for <gnu-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2002 20:03:58 +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 172FV5-0004q6-00; Mon, 29 Apr 2002 14:03:47 -0400
Original-Received: from balder.inter.net.il ([192.114.186.15])
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian))
	id 172FSO-0004f4-00
	for <gnu-emacs-bug@gnu.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2002 14:01:00 -0400
Original-Received: from Zaretsky ([80.230.2.40])
	by balder.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.1.0.54-GA)
	with ESMTP id BJL87726;
	Mon, 29 Apr 2002 21:00:54 +0300 (IDT)
Original-To: monnier+gnu/emacs/bug@rum.cs.yale.edu
X-Mailer: emacs 21.2.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-Reply-To: <200204291259.g3TCxi119424@rum.cs.yale.edu>
	(monnier+gnu/emacs/bug@rum.cs.yale.edu)
Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-admin@gnu.org
X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnu-emacs>,
	<mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
	the Swiss army knife of text editors <bug-gnu-emacs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnu-emacs>,
	<mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/bug-gnu-emacs/>
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:1027
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs:1027

> From: "Stefan Monnier" <monnier+gnu/emacs/bug@rum.cs.yale.edu>
> Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 08:59:44 -0400
> 
> I believe we've lost track of the problem.
> Do you agree with the patch below ?

I'm not sure I do.

> It is safe and does not change any heuristic.  I don't think it's
> "open to interpretation" because it only changes the behavior when
> there are CRLFs in the file (otherwise the auto-detection would not
> have chosen dos-style eol)

Let me remind you that auto-detection only examines 3 lines before it
decides.