Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")
Fri Jul 9 17:24:00 GMT 2004
*** Christopher Faylor (email@example.com)...:
:) On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 09:18:30AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote:
:) >*** Christopher Faylor
:) >:) On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:27:55AM +0100, William Blunn wrote:
:) >:) >I have set up several web-based systems which do this, and it
:) >:) >wasn't hard.
:) >:) >On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 06:26:27PM -0400, Christopher Faylor
:) >:) >wrote:
:) >:) >>Finally, you (Igor) are right that we are not going to change the
:) >:) >>sourceware.org software to wrap in any other fashion than it does
:) >:) >>now.
:) >:) sourceware.org, the home of cygwin.com, is a technical site. The
:) >:) mailing lists that it sponsors are for technical discussions.
:) >:) In these discussions, the formatting of messages could conceivably
:) >:) actually *mean something*. It's entirely possible that someone
:) >:) meant to use 997 characters in one of the lines of their message to
:) >:) illustrate a point or even to provide a patch.
:) >If someone sends a 997 characters line, I will see it wrapped in my
:) >e-mail program, 12 times wrapped. It will not be cut at the width of
:) >the screen. That's very helpful in my opinion.
:) Maybe you're being purposely obtuse. I don't know. My point was that
:) if I send specially formatted text in my messages to a technical
:) mailing list I don't want the archiving software to unformat it for me.
:) What it does to the email reader on your PDA is irrelevant.
What you do not understand is that i am talking about a PDA as a screen,
like the one that you are reading your e-mail message.
Since you wondered, I am not purposely obstuse, I am stating my opinion.
We just happen to disagree on this point.
:) >If someone provides a patch and I were to cut and paste that patch, I
:) >would call myself crazy, I would normally save the patch to a file
:) >directly, so this is not an issue.
:) The issue is inspecting the patch in the archives. If you have to
:) puzzle out where the line breaks actually occur because your web
:) browser is helpfully wrapping things for you, then the utility of the
:) archives has been diminished for some people (like me).
I understand, I see how this could be an issue. But adding <BR>, as I
mentioned before fixes this problem.
:) >On the other hand, just to mention something, instead of saying "NO,
:) >it won't happen", maybe you may want to experiment on adding <BR> at
:) >the end of each line, or adding <P> instead of having empty lines, or
:) >things like that. Probably does not work out of the box, but it
:) >probably can be tuned to fit most messages, if not all.
:) That's sort of presumptuous, don't you think?
:) You don't even know how the archives are generated but you have no
:) qualms about suggesting that I take my time trying to "fix" something
:) which I've already indicated is not broken.
I do not need to know how the archives are generated to see that they are
broken, but if you want to spare your time explaining this to me, I am
happy to read it.
I never used the word "fix", please do not misunderstand me. I refer to
this as "enhance". Yes, it is broken, by the way.
:) Again, I am not going to spend any time trying to set up the cygwin
:) mailing list as a special case. There are surely other sites archiving
:) the mailing list out there somewhere. Use one of them if the
:) formatting in the sourceware.org archive offends you.
It has not offended me. Did I say so?
:) OTOH, if anyone wants to change the policy of sourceware.org, you are
:) welcome to send email to the overseers mailing list and lobby for
:) change. I don't think you are going to find a receptive audience, but
:) I could be wrong.
I don't think it's the time to send such request. I will wait a couple of
years to do so.
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
More information about the Cygwin