A very stupid question about formatting a patch :)

[John Koepi]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Greg KH <greg at kroah.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 01:08:43PM +0300, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:
> > > I don't see anyone removing that line, perhaps you aren't looking at
> > > the patch properly in an email client?
> > >
> > > Leave it in there, it's good to have.
> >
> > There is way too much traffic in LMKL for me to read it with e-mail
> > client. This is why I'm using lkml.org. Here are just a few random
> > patches that were sent today:
> >
> > * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/160
> > * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/155
> > * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/131
> > * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/123
> > * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/120
> > * https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/18/98
> >
> > No empty lines. Maybe in fact there are empty lines but lkml.org
> > removed them?
>
> Yup, it looks that way, the above patches all have that line in them
> when I look at the real emails.
>
> I recommend using a real email client when dealing with patches, allmost
> all web interfaces will mess them up.
>

It looks like usual text to html formatting issue. System tend to replace
\n with <br />, yet fails somewhere chewing an empty line.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20160818/e010fa4d/attachment.html