Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: .gitignore patch for coverage builds

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <kevin(dot)grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: .gitignore patch for coverage builds
Date: 2011-01-26 22:41:39
Message-ID: 1296081501-sup-1890@alvh.no-ip.org (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of mié ene 26 19:20:52 -0300 2011:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> Ick. That's an awful lot of stuff to have global ignores for.
> 
> > The "coverage" directory ignore seems a little icky, but the rest
> > seems unlikely to pick up anything incidental.
> 
> Tying /coverage to the root as in his V2 makes that better,

Hmm, I don't think that works, because you can run "make coverage" in
any subdir and it will create a "coverage" subdir there.

> but I'm
> still unexcited about the thesis that we should auto-ignore the results
> of any random tool somebody wants to run in their source tree.

Well, in this case it's not any random tool, because it's integrated
into our makefiles.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2011-01-26 22:41:44
Subject: Re: ALTER TYPE 3: add facility to identify further no-work cases
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-01-26 22:40:28
Subject: Re: new compiler warnings

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group