Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> writes:
> Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> writes: > >> On 4/13/20 4:32 PM, Alex Bennée wrote: >>> >>> Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> writes: >>> >>>> On 4/13/20 11:29 AM, Alex Bennée wrote: >>>>> As out-of-tree builds become more common (or rather building in a >>>>> subdir) we can add a lot of load to "git ls-files" as it hunts down >>>>> sub-directories that are irrelevant to the source tree. This is >>>>> especially annoying if you have a prompt that attempts to summarise >>>>> the current git status on command completion. >>>>> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <alex.ben...@linaro.org> >>>>> --- >>>>> .gitignore | 2 ++ >>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>>>> diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore >>>>> index 0c5af83aa74..7757dc08a08 100644 >>>>> --- a/.gitignore >>>>> +++ b/.gitignore >>>>> @@ -141,6 +141,8 @@ cscope.* >>>>> tags >>>>> TAGS >>>>> docker-src.* >>>>> +build >>>>> +builds >>>> >>>> Would 'build-*' be worth adding as well? >>> >>> Sure - I'll add it to v2. >> >> Or even consolidate it into a single pattern: build* (which would >> allow 'build', 'builds', 'build1', 'build23', 'build-fedora', >> 'build-bug1234', ...) > > The looser the pattern, the higher the risk of unwanted matches. > > Would be less of an issue if we had a cleaner source root directory. True but as of now we don't have anything matching bu* so I think build* is fairly safe. I have ran into problems with over lax .gitignore stanzas before but I don't think it's taken too long to figure out what was going on. It's not like having a build subdir isn't a common "out-of-tree" build idiom. -- Alex Bennée
