Re: CRLF in upstream source code

2022-03-15 Thread Eriberto Mota
Em ter., 15 de mar. de 2022 às 13:29, escreveu: > > > > Why should it matter to anything, including Debian, unless there are > > > technical problems caused by that? > > > > So such as not compiling. Or another reason not yet shared with us. > > > > No problem with building the package. I just sa

Re: CRLF in upstream source code

2022-03-15 Thread lourisvaldo
> > Why should it matter to anything, including Debian, unless there are > > technical problems caused by that? > > So such as not compiling. Or another reason not yet shared with us. > No problem with building the package. I just saw a comment on a bug and I was in doubt [1]. I decided to ask

Re: CRLF in upstream source code

2022-03-14 Thread Geert Stappers
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 08:51:27PM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 12:25:53PM -0300, Lourisvaldo Figueredo Junior wrote: > > I have a doubt. In cases where the upstream uses the MS-DOS pattern CRLF > > ("\r\n") to end of line, instead Unix pattern LF ("\n"). > > In this s

Re: CRLF in upstream source code

2022-03-14 Thread Andrey Rahmatullin
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 12:25:53PM -0300, Lourisvaldo Figueredo Junior wrote: > I have a doubt. In cases where the upstream uses the MS-DOS pattern CRLF > ("\r\n") to end of line, instead Unix pattern LF ("\n"). > In this situation, should the maintainer make a patch converting this files > to >

CRLF in upstream source code

2022-03-14 Thread Lourisvaldo Figueredo Junior
Hi everyone, I have a doubt. In cases where the upstream uses the MS-DOS pattern CRLF ("\r\n") to end of line, instead Unix pattern LF ("\n"). In this situation, should the maintainer make a patch converting this files to the Unix pattern LF? Or to Debian is 'acceptable' to build a package from