diff for duplicates of <23B59EBB-DD4E-4F79-8294-BCE1BE7B9888@goldelico.com>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index 24d7ac3..8746cc4 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -1,42 +1,50 @@
 Hi Greg,
 
-> Am 18.08.2016 um 12:57 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>:
-> 
+> Am 18.08.2016 um 12:57 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman =
+<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>:
+>=20
 > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 12:54:15PM +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
 >> Hi Pavel,
->> 
+>>=20
 >>> Am 18.08.2016 um 12:47 schrieb Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>:
->>> 
->>> 
->>>> 
->>>> Thereof 4 files, ~260 changes w/o gps demo and documentation/bindings.
->>> 
->>> So what do you use for the serial devices? platform_device was vetoed
+>>>=20
+>>>=20
+>>>>=20
+>>>> Thereof 4 files, ~260 changes w/o gps demo and =
+documentation/bindings.
+>>>=20
+>>> So what do you use for the serial devices? platform_device was =
+vetoed
 >>> for that purpose by Greg.
->> 
+>>=20
 >> device tree?
-> 
+>=20
 > No.
 
-? Sorry, but each time Pavel jumps in, he just copies half of a statement and
+? Sorry, but each time Pavel jumps in, he just copies half of a =
+statement and
 any reply gets misunderstood.
 
-I did not even mention platform_device, still you disagree to device tree for the
+I did not even mention platform_device, still you disagree to device =
+tree for the
 *slave driver*?
 
-> 
+>=20
 > This patchset from Rob is the way I have been saying it should be done
 > for years now.  Yes, a "bus" takes up more boilerplate code (blame me
 > for that), but overall, it makes the drivers simpler,
 
-Sorry, but I don't see how Rob's approach makes it simpler to write a device driver
-than our original proposal, which btw is also sort of a bus and I see only some implementation
+Sorry, but I don't see how Rob's approach makes it simpler to write a =
+device driver
+than our original proposal, which btw is also sort of a bus and I see =
+only some implementation
 differences.
 
-Except that IMHO Rob's approach lacks functions we need (which maybe can added).
+Except that IMHO Rob's approach lacks functions we need (which maybe can =
+added).
 
 > and fits into the
 > rest of the kernel driver/device model much better.
 
 BR and thanks,
-Nikolaus
\ No newline at end of file
+Nikolaus=
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index b8a52af..8524a02 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -48,46 +48,54 @@
 [
   "Hi Greg,\n",
   "\n",
-  "> Am 18.08.2016 um 12:57 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh\@linuxfoundation.org>:\n",
-  "> \n",
+  "> Am 18.08.2016 um 12:57 schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman =\n",
+  "<gregkh\@linuxfoundation.org>:\n",
+  ">=20\n",
   "> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 12:54:15PM +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:\n",
   ">> Hi Pavel,\n",
-  ">> \n",
+  ">>=20\n",
   ">>> Am 18.08.2016 um 12:47 schrieb Pavel Machek <pavel\@ucw.cz>:\n",
-  ">>> \n",
-  ">>> \n",
-  ">>>> \n",
-  ">>>> Thereof 4 files, ~260 changes w/o gps demo and documentation/bindings.\n",
-  ">>> \n",
-  ">>> So what do you use for the serial devices? platform_device was vetoed\n",
+  ">>>=20\n",
+  ">>>=20\n",
+  ">>>>=20\n",
+  ">>>> Thereof 4 files, ~260 changes w/o gps demo and =\n",
+  "documentation/bindings.\n",
+  ">>>=20\n",
+  ">>> So what do you use for the serial devices? platform_device was =\n",
+  "vetoed\n",
   ">>> for that purpose by Greg.\n",
-  ">> \n",
+  ">>=20\n",
   ">> device tree?\n",
-  "> \n",
+  ">=20\n",
   "> No.\n",
   "\n",
-  "? Sorry, but each time Pavel jumps in, he just copies half of a statement and\n",
+  "? Sorry, but each time Pavel jumps in, he just copies half of a =\n",
+  "statement and\n",
   "any reply gets misunderstood.\n",
   "\n",
-  "I did not even mention platform_device, still you disagree to device tree for the\n",
+  "I did not even mention platform_device, still you disagree to device =\n",
+  "tree for the\n",
   "*slave driver*?\n",
   "\n",
-  "> \n",
+  ">=20\n",
   "> This patchset from Rob is the way I have been saying it should be done\n",
   "> for years now.  Yes, a \"bus\" takes up more boilerplate code (blame me\n",
   "> for that), but overall, it makes the drivers simpler,\n",
   "\n",
-  "Sorry, but I don't see how Rob's approach makes it simpler to write a device driver\n",
-  "than our original proposal, which btw is also sort of a bus and I see only some implementation\n",
+  "Sorry, but I don't see how Rob's approach makes it simpler to write a =\n",
+  "device driver\n",
+  "than our original proposal, which btw is also sort of a bus and I see =\n",
+  "only some implementation\n",
   "differences.\n",
   "\n",
-  "Except that IMHO Rob's approach lacks functions we need (which maybe can added).\n",
+  "Except that IMHO Rob's approach lacks functions we need (which maybe can =\n",
+  "added).\n",
   "\n",
   "> and fits into the\n",
   "> rest of the kernel driver/device model much better.\n",
   "\n",
   "BR and thanks,\n",
-  "Nikolaus"
+  "Nikolaus="
 ]
 
-02161d1ed239d2957c1089fba64818a9f7979d714109908d1f441d89a93e1a8e
+ffdd4344f8b5c8e8eeed442916ba67d68056c63b8b6a77b706e654ac56eb1ff6
