'annotate' behavior on text files turned into binary files

Hello,

I've been using darcs for a while and really, really like
it. Today I  
ran across a strange thing.

I'm not used to using 'annotate' and so I may be
misunderstanding  
what is happening here, but I have a CSS file which at some
point  
along the way was given some "binary" contents --
I found this  
because someone working on the file was telling me they were
not  
seeing their changes when recording, just the indication
that there  
were (binary) changes to the file.

It turned out their patch actually corrected the problem
(and so was  
still a binary diff, though the resulting file was not) --
so out of  
curiosity I wondered where the problem came from. I unpulled
their  
patch, confirmed there was a line in the file with some
strange  
characters, and figured I could do 'darcs annotate' to see
which  
change was responsible for that line.

To my surprise, 'annotate' seems to be giving me lines of
the file  
which were last recorded as text, but which are not
currently in the  
file; that is, the changes subsequent to the patch that
introduced  
control characters are disregarded in the output. I see,
listed above  
actual annotated lines of the file, lines corresponding to
the binary  
patches to the file that look like this:

   # Following line added by [Adding new images and CSS for
design
   # modifieranon.com**20070816180212]
    Binary file

(All of these patches were made after the initial import of
the file,  
which was in fact the last time the file was not binary.)

And at the very top of the output, at the head of the file:

   # File stylesheet.css created by [Add design files
   # creatoranon.com**20070808021240]  as ./stylesheet.css
   +Binary file

Although the patch that created the file did not create it
as a  
binary file.

Is this the expected behavior of 'annotate' in this
circumstance? Or  
is there no expectation of behavior on text files which have
been  
(inadvertently) turned into binary files? I can certainly
understand  
it would be impractical or generally useless to pinpoint the
binary  
sections in the file and display them on their own lines, or
not  
display them, but does this mean that for this particular
file,  
annotate will never yield correct results?

I can delete the file and re-add it, which would set us on
the right  
track, but I thought I'd ask about this situation.

I did manage to discover whose patch was binary with
'changes -v'.

Thanks!
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
darcs-usersdarcs.net

http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users