[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070608013521.GW7266@flower.upol.cz>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 03:35:21 +0200
From: Oleg Verych <olecom@...wer.upol.cz>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
kbuild-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Another version of cleanfile/cleanpatch
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 04:19:56PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Oleg Verych wrote:
> >
> > Because of that, i think, following is redundant:
> >
> > - to check for binary files
>
> find . -type f | xargs cleanfile
What about patches?
Anyway, by agreement (with myself), i've stopped on having per-file-name
division (prev. message first patch, and that was last design remaining
from cleanfile/cleanpatch). So:
for f in $*
do clean-whitespace $f 2>&1 >/dev/null
done
But this doesn't look like interactive usage, which i've concluded.
Plus copy is saved in $f.clean file, so user can `diff -u` to see any
destruction and possibly report a bug.
[]
> > - scan whole file for long lines, with useless bunch of messages about
> > ones. Useless, because script doesn't fix that, it can't do that!
>
> Still useful to let the human know what is going on, and why.
What i've done was `cleanpatch patch-2.6.21-rc4-rc5`
That's where usefulness comes from ;)
> -hpa
____
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists