[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: Improvements to clean and distclean targets
On Tue, 2016-01-19 at 11:06 +0100, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 19/01/16 10:38, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Tue, 2016-01-19 at 01:43 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > > On 18.01.16 at 19:19, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 18/01/16 16:57, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > > > > On 18.01.16 at 17:45, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On 18/01/16 16:41, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On 18.01.16 at 17:27, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > * Move '*~' and 'core' into the find rule. > > > > > > > I don't understand this part: Where in the build process do > > > > > > > such > > > > > > > get > > > > > > > generated? I'm tempted to instead recommend to just drop > > > > > > > those > > > > > > > from the rm invocation... > > > > > > No idea about 'core' files, but *~ are emacs backup files. > > > > > But emacs should clean up after itself; this shouldn't be the job > > > > > of our clean rule. > > > > > > > > Why? the point is to have a one-revision old version of the file to > > > > hand. > > > > > > I guess there may be different strategies here: My editor also > > > creates such named files, but deletes them as the program gets > > > shut down. I.e. the one-revision old backup exists as long as the > > > program is running. I can see benefits from the alternative > > > model, but still it shouldn't be our scripts to clean up such > > > backups. > > > After all - what if another program used another name patter for > > > its backups? Would we go clean those up then too? > > > > IMHO these files should be in .gitignore (so they don't clutter "git > > status", AFAICT this is already done correctly) but it's not really > > necessary for "make clean" (or distclean) to get rid of them, that's up > > to > > either the editor or the user. IOW I'd be happy removing the existing > > rules. > > What about adding a "make gitclean" which will remove all files ignored > by git? It could use .gitignore (or even "git clean -dffq"). This way > "make [dist]clean" could be limited to the files created by the build > process on purpose. IMHO people should just use "git clean" in whichever way suits them if this is they want. Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |