[PATCH 0/4] Don't warn about missing EOL for symlinks · Michael J Gruber <hidden> · 2016-06-15
[PATCH 1/4] diff/xdiff: refactor EOF-EOL detection · Michael J Gruber <hidden> · 2016-06-15
Re: [PATCH 1/4] diff/xdiff: refactor EOF-EOL detection · Junio C Hamano <hidden> · 2016-06-15
Re: [PATCH 1/4] diff/xdiff: refactor EOF-EOL detection · Michael J Gruber <hidden> · 2016-06-15
Re: [PATCH 1/4] diff/xdiff: refactor EOF-EOL detection · Junio C Hamano <hidden> · 2016-06-15
Re: [PATCH 1/4] diff/xdiff: refactor EOF-EOL detection · Johannes Sixt <hidden> · 2016-06-15
Re: [PATCH 1/4] diff/xdiff: refactor EOF-EOL detection · Jeff King <hidden> · 2016-06-15
Re: [PATCH 1/4] diff/xdiff: refactor EOF-EOL detection · Michael J Gruber <hidden> · 2016-06-15
[PATCH 3/4] diff: Do not warn about missing EOL at EOF for symlinks · Michael J Gruber <hidden> · 2016-06-15
Re: [PATCH 3/4] diff: Do not warn about missing EOL at EOF for symlinks · Jeff King <hidden> · 2016-06-15
[PATCH 4/4] RFC: add whitespace rule for no-eol-at-eof · Michael J Gruber <hidden> · 2016-06-15
[PATCH 2/4] diff: make treatment of missing EOL at EOF configurable · Michael J Gruber <hidden> · 2016-06-15

Re: [PATCH 1/4] diff/xdiff: refactor EOF-EOL detection

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:48:54

Michael J Gruber [off-list ref] writes:

This puts the "No newline at end of file" warning for both code paths

This is not a warning.

It is an integral part of the diff output specification that allows patch
recipients to correctly reproduce incomplete lines.  Removing this from
the output is simply out of question.

`h`	back out one level
`j`	next message in thread
`k`	previous message in thread
`l`	drill in
`Esc`	close help / fold thread tree
`?`	toggle this help