From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27252 invoked by alias); 22 Dec 2010 05:32:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 27226 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Dec 2010 05:32:42 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 05:32:37 +0000 Received: (qmail 7741 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2010 05:32:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.101?) (yao@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 22 Dec 2010 05:32:27 -0000 Message-ID: <4D118D33.2070605@codesourcery.com> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 05:32:00 -0000 From: Yao Qi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdbserver: start a gitignore References: <1292416368-24885-1-git-send-email-vapier@gentoo.org> <20101222044518.GJ2596@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20101222044518.GJ2596@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-12/txt/msg00388.txt.bz2 On 12/22/2010 12:45 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> diff --git a/gdb/gdbserver/.gitignore b/gdb/gdbserver/.gitignore >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..9c94950 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/gdb/gdbserver/.gitignore >> @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ >> +gdbreplay >> +gdbserver >> +reg-*.c >> +version.c > > I'm OK but slightly hesitant to introduce a .gitignore for files that > are compilation artifacts, not development artifacts. If we start > on that road, the list is possibly quite long. > > I believe that we should encourage people to compile GDB using > a build directory that is different from the source directory. > Except I don't know why I think that! :-). I know that I have been > told that this should be the cannonical way of building GNU projects, > and that the in-source build might one day become unsupported. > I just know that I find it more convenient, precisely because > it avoids polluting my source tree with such build artifacts. > Yes, it is not recommended to build in source dir. The patch looks good, but not necessary. -- Yao (齐尧)