Re: [PATCHv2] [fixincludes] Ignore .DS_Store junk files when running make check
On 7/27/15, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Eric Gallager writes:
>
>> Okay, I tried embedding "! -name CVS/ ! -name .svn/" into the find
>
> -name does an exact match, so you don't need the slash.
>
> Andreas.
>
Okay, attached a new version of the patch; make check for fixincludes
still passes with it. Could someone commit it for me? I don't have
commit access. It's still pretty trivial, so I shouldn't need a
copyright assignment for it, should I?
Eric.
fixincludes/check.tpl | 5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fixincludes/check.tpl b/fixincludes/check.tpl
index 0d1f444..ffd2b66 100644
--- a/fixincludes/check.tpl
+++ b/fixincludes/check.tpl
@@ -141,9 +141,8 @@ echo $exitok`
cd $TESTBASE
-find * -type f -print | \
-fgrep -v 'CVS/' | \
-fgrep -v '.svn/' > ${TESTDIR}/LIST
+find * -type f ! -name .DS_Store ! -name CVS ! -name .svn -print \
+> ${TESTDIR}/LIST
exitok=`
exec < ${TESTDIR}/LIST
Re: [PATCHv2] [fixincludes] Ignore .DS_Store junk files when running make check
Definitely much better. I won't apply it until the weekend, so someone else will likely beat me to it. Thank you. On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 7:36 PM, Eric Gallager wrote: > On 7/27/15, Andreas Schwab wrote: >> Eric Gallager writes: >> >>> Okay, I tried embedding "! -name CVS/ ! -name .svn/" into the find
Re: [PATCHv2] [fixincludes] Ignore .DS_Store junk files when running make check
On Jul 28, 2015, at 6:38 AM, Bruce Korb wrote: > Definitely much better. I won't apply it until the weekend, so > someone else will likely beat me to it. Looks good to me as well, I checked it in. Committed revision 226317.
Re: [PATCHv2] [fixincludes] Ignore .DS_Store junk files when running make check
On Jul 27, 2015, at 7:36 PM, Eric Gallager wrote: > On 7/27/15, Andreas Schwab wrote: >> Eric Gallager writes: >> >>> Okay, I tried embedding "! -name CVS/ ! -name .svn/" into the find >> >> -name does an exact match, so you don't need the slash. > Okay, attached a new version of the patch; make check for fixincludes > still passes with it. If someone can test the gcc-5 branch with it and if it fixes it, I’ll approve it for the 5 branch as well.
