On 05 Mar 2018 14:33, Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 3/5/18 1:15 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On 02 Mar 2018 14:25, Chet Ramey wrote:
> >> On 2/27/18 11:46 AM, don fong wrote:
> >>> Chet, thanks for the suggestion.
> >>>
> >>> i still wonder what's the objection to changing .gitignore?
> >>
> >> I don't t
On 3/5/18 1:15 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 02 Mar 2018 14:25, Chet Ramey wrote:
>> On 2/27/18 11:46 AM, don fong wrote:
>>> Chet, thanks for the suggestion.
>>>
>>> i still wonder what's the objection to changing .gitignore?
>>
>> I don't think it will be useful to me, since I curate the commits
On 02 Mar 2018 14:25, Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 2/27/18 11:46 AM, don fong wrote:
> > Chet, thanks for the suggestion.
> >
> > i still wonder what's the objection to changing .gitignore?
>
> I don't think it will be useful to me, since I curate the commits I
> make to the various branches, but I don
On 2/27/18 11:46 AM, don fong wrote:
> Chet, thanks for the suggestion.
>
> i still wonder what's the objection to changing .gitignore?
I don't think it will be useful to me, since I curate the commits I
make to the various branches, but I don't have any real objection if
it will help others.
--
Chet, thanks for the suggestion.
i still wonder what's the objection to changing .gitignore?
using a separate directory to build, while i'm working on the sources,
feels less convenient.
On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 1:10 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 2/25/18 2:49 PM, don fong wrote:
> > Chet, i'm
On 2/25/18 2:49 PM, don fong wrote:
> Chet, i'm not sure i understand your suggestion.
>
>> You don't have to build in the source directory.
>
> i don't see anything in the INSTALL or README files about building outside
> the source dir.
> according to INSTALL,
This is a standard feature of any
Chet, i'm not sure i understand your suggestion.
> You don't have to build in the source directory.
i don't see anything in the INSTALL or README files about building outside
the source dir.
according to INSTALL,
The simplest way to compile Bash is:
> 1. 'cd' to the directory containing the so
On 2/24/18 3:36 PM, don fong wrote:
> Eric, thanks for the tip.
>
> my feeling is that regardless of whether these files are pushed, they
> clutter up the "git status" listing after i've done a build.
You don't have to build in the source directory.
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to l
Eric, thanks for the tip.
my feeling is that regardless of whether these files are pushed, they
clutter up the "git status" listing after i've done a build.
On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 02/24/2018 01:26 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
>>
>> On 2/24/18 1:46 AM, don fong wrote:
On 02/24/2018 01:26 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
On 2/24/18 1:46 AM, don fong wrote:
based on my experience creating one patch, running "make" and "make
test", i found that "git status" was reporting a lot of generated and
built files that i think should be ignored.
Those files aren't ever pushed to
On 2/24/18 1:46 AM, don fong wrote:
> based on my experience creating one patch, running "make" and "make
> test", i found that "git status" was reporting a lot of generated and
> built files that i think should be ignored.
Those files aren't ever pushed to the bash git repositories (master,
devel
based on my experience creating one patch, running "make" and "make
test", i found that "git status" was reporting a lot of generated and
built files that i think should be ignored.
i added the "untracked" files to .gitignore, and this is the patch.
ign.patch
Description: Binary data
12 matches
Mail list logo