Bug#515540: ignores .swp, but not .swo, etc

2009-03-15 Thread Raphael Hertzog
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Joey Hess wrote: > Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > I can add .swo but I don't think it's safe/interesting to ignore .sw[a-p]. > > Is that enough for you? > > > Flash file are .swf for examples and it would be annoying to lose them > > because we were too generous in the default ig

Bug#515540: ignores .swp, but not .swo, etc

2009-02-16 Thread Joey Hess
Raphael Hertzog wrote: > I can add .swo but I don't think it's safe/interesting to ignore .sw[a-p]. > Is that enough for you? > Flash file are .swf for examples and it would be annoying to lose them > because we were too generous in the default ignore list. Is it not possible to ignore `.*.sw?`

Bug#515540: ignores .swp, but not .swo, etc

2009-02-16 Thread Raphael Hertzog
Hi, On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Joey Hess wrote: > The default ignores includes vi .swp files, but vim will also create > .swo, .swn, etc if the same file is being edited by two or more vims > at once. I can add .swo but I don't think it's safe/interesting to ignore .sw[a-p]. Is that enough for you? Fl

Bug#515540: ignores .swp, but not .swo, etc

2009-02-15 Thread Joey Hess
Package: dpkg-dev Version: 1.14.25 Severity: minor The default ignores includes vi .swp files, but vim will also create .swo, .swn, etc if the same file is being edited by two or more vims at once. -- System Information: Debian Release: 5.0 APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') A