Re: [Xen-devel] [XEN PATCH 3/8] xen: Update Kconfig to Linux v5.4

[Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 11:16:52AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> What headers are you taking about? My question was about the placement
> of .gitignore entries only. I'm pretty sure I had previously expressed
> that I'm not overly happy to see needless scattering around of them.
> I'm merely trying to understand if here we have a case of "needless".
>
> > I find your lack of consistency in review requests impossible to predict.
> 
> What consistency? What's wrong with putting the two lines in the top
> level .gitignore, or keeping them where they are? I anyway doubt
> there's a need to keep our .gitignore in sync with Linux'es.

I think scattering the .gitignore around make them easier to manage,
especially when entries aren't useful anymore. Otherwise, we end up
with a .gitignore at the root with entries that aren't needed anymore
because they can be hard to figure out if they are useful or not.
Or, when globing is involve, we could end-up ignoring files that
shouldn't.

I'm planning to import more of Kbuild, which Makefile.host comes from,
to build only the hypervisor, so there's going to be other artefact that
will be generated only in xen/. So I've added those two new entries in
xen/.gitignore in anticipation, and to avoid getting xen/tools/kconfig
out-of-sync with Linux's one (Well I didn't know those two entries were
there in the first place).

I could add "/xen/**/*.tab.[ch]" in the root .gitignore if you prefer
even though I don't like this approch.

Cheers,

-- 
Anthony PERARD

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel