RE: mode line eol char indication

[Drew Adams]

> > So you are arguing that it is the system/platform name that 
> > is more meaningful to users, not the eol characters. I'm OK with that.
> 
> I'm not. \n, \r and \r\n (or ^J, etc) are exact: what they say is what
> the file contains. "Unix", "DOS" and "Mac" are just hints about the
> likely origin. Is not like it is impossible to create CRLF files under
> GNU/Linux, or LF files on Windows.

I think I already said that my preference too is to show the eol chars, and I
agree with your reason. This is about the buffer content, after all, not
necessarily about a platform.

I'm OK however with either approach - whichever most people prefer. But we
should stick to one of them. It makes little sense to have sometimes `(DOS)' and
sometimes `\', which mean the same thing.