On Wed, 29 Apr 2015, Alex Pilon wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 08:33:51AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > some (hopefully) trivial questions about .gitignore, since the
> > actual documentation isn't as precise as it could be.
>
> Which? gitignore(5)?
in the end, that's the one i'm using as the authoritative source.
> > and another thing ... why both of these lines?
> >
> > include/generated
> > arch/*/include/generated
> >
> > isn't there a wildcard pattern that would subsume both of those
> > entries?
>
> **/include/generated
that's what i thought, given that the "**/" allows matching in the
current directory. so, aesthetically, that pair of lines could be
condensed. actually, i'm wondering why the simple directory reference:
generated/
wouldn't be the best entry. surely the name "generated" is defined in
the kernel as representing generated content and should never be
tracked, no?
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
http://crashcourse.ca
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
========================================================================
_______________________________________________
Linux mailing list
Linux@lists.oclug.on.ca
http://oclug.on.ca/mailman/listinfo/linux
