[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] gitignore: ignore top level build/ directory

Thomas Monjalon thomas at monjalon.net
Tue May 22 23:45:31 CEST 2018


19/12/2016 18:14, Bruce Richardson:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 04:50:57PM +0000, Mcnamara, John wrote:
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Richardson
> > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 03:05:20PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > > 2016-12-13 12:02, Ferruh Yigit:
> > > > > On 12/13/2016 11:48 AM, Baruch Siach wrote:
> > > > > > RTE_OUTPUT defaults to build/.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Baruch Siach <baruch at tkos.co.il>
> > > > >
> > > > > There is a similar patch:
> > > > > http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/11637/
> > > > >
> > > > > If you want you can review/comment that one too.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, sorry I've never commented above patch.
> > > >
> > > > I do not like filling .gitignore because I prefer seeing what is built
> > > > or copied or whatever with "git status".
> > > > What is really the benefit of .gitignore?
> > > 
> > > I take the opposite view. I only like to see files that I actually care
> > > about in the git status. Any build artifacts should be ignored by git as
> > > they are not files that it ever should track. That way doing a build does
> > > not change the status of the repo as git sees it.
> > 
> > As a workaround I have the following in my .gitconfig:
> > 
> >     [core]
> >     excludesfile = ~/.gitignore
> > 
> > Then I put the ignore rules in ~/.gitignore.
> > 
> > John
> > 
> Yes, I have something similar done, so this is not a problem for me
> personally. I just find it strange that we don't make more use of
> gitignore in DPDK. The file's name itself seems to imply that it should
> be used to list out files that git should not track, and build output is
> definitely one of those.

I don't understand why we should hide the default build directory and not
the other ones with different names.
It would be perceived as inconsistent and confusing.




More information about the dev mailing list