This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 12010 - regression: java sources are not windows linebreak friendly
Summary: regression: java sources are not windows linebreak friendly
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 58236
Alias: None
Product: java
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Unsupported (show other bugs)
Version: 3.x
Hardware: PC Windows 3.1/NT
: P2 blocker (vote)
Assignee: issues@java
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2001-05-08 00:51 UTC by ssffleming
Modified: 2007-09-26 09:14 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Issue Type: ENHANCEMENT
Exception Reporter:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description ssffleming 2001-05-08 00:51:51 UTC
Testing using Pilsen build 010507 on NT.

Steps to reproduce:

create a new multiline java source file using FFJ.

view the file using the windows notepad.  Line breaks are not recognized.

I think this used to work.  Can impact developers using IDE with other tools.
Comment 1 Jan Lahoda 2001-05-10 09:31:33 UTC
So, this looks like java template problem, so moving to java.
Comment 2 Svata Dedic 2001-05-14 15:02:42 UTC
It's not a regression, actually. It is because 
a) the editing support for .java files remembers line separators which it 
encountered during file reading
b) templates use plain LF line separators.

Comment 3 Svata Dedic 2001-06-06 09:33:37 UTC
Changing to a feature. This is a file-related property that should be 
controlled on per-session and per-file basis. Generic support may be required 
from openide. Should be implemented in 3.3 release.
Comment 4 Jan Chalupa 2001-11-27 12:49:58 UTC
Target milestone -> 3.3.1.
Comment 5 Svata Dedic 2002-05-21 17:49:15 UTC
Cleaning up before 4.0 planning
Comment 6 Marek Grummich 2002-07-19 16:19:08 UTC
Target milestone was changed from not determined to TBD
Comment 7 Jan Becicka 2005-10-12 14:24:48 UTC

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 58236 ***