Skip to contentSkip to conversation

Handle defconfig as .config in .gitignore and distclean.

PATCH New kaszak at gmail.com 4 participants 6 messages May 20, 2015 – Dec 28, 2015 Kbuild

lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 Handle defconfig as .config in .gitignore and distclean.

From: Karoly Kasza <[email protected]>

After using "make safedefconfig", a defconfig file appears which is an extract of the .config file. When running git, it incorrectly detects it as a source code change, while make distclean forgets to remove it.

This patch adds /defconfig to .gitignore and to the distclean Makefile target.

---
 .gitignore |    1 +
 Makefile   |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
.gitignore +1 -0
index bb02d9f..66f5ac1 100644
@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
 /.config.old
 /..config.tmp
 /.config
+/defconfig
 *.depend
 *.o
 /*.patch
Makefile +1 -1
index 5c4293b..bc890dd 100644
@@ -814,7 +814,7 @@ endif
 ifeq ($(O),output)
 	rm -rf $(O)
 endif
-	rm -rf $(BR2_CONFIG) $(CONFIG_DIR)/.config.old $(CONFIG_DIR)/..config.tmp \
+	rm -rf $(BR2_CONFIG) $(CONFIG_DIR)/defconfig $(CONFIG_DIR)/.config.old $(CONFIG_DIR)/..config.tmp \
 		$(CONFIG_DIR)/.auto.deps
 
 help:
Signature · 1 line
1.7.10.4
#1 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 Handle defconfig as .config in .gitignore and distclean.

I'm not sure I like that...

people are told to work with a clone of buildroot and adding defconfig
to gitignore means that ther is a high chance of not adding it to git
and loosing it...

(i'm perfectly fine with the distclean part)

Cordialement

J?r?my Rosen
+33 (0)1 42 68 28 04

fight key loggers : write some perl using vim

Open Wide Ingenierie

23, rue Daviel
75013 Paris - France
www.openwide.fr

----- Mail original -----

Quoted 52 lines

From: Karoly Kasza <[email protected]>

After using "make safedefconfig", a defconfig file appears which is an
extract of the .config file. When running git, it incorrectly detects it as a
source code change, while make distclean forgets to remove it.

This patch adds /defconfig to .gitignore and to the distclean Makefile target.

---
 .gitignore |    1 +
 Makefile   |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
.gitignore +1 -0
index bb02d9f..66f5ac1 100644
@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
 /.config.old
 /..config.tmp
 /.config
+/defconfig
 *.depend
 *.o
 /*.patch
Makefile +1 -1
index 5c4293b..bc890dd 100644
@@ -814,7 +814,7 @@ endif
 ifeq ($(O),output)
 	rm -rf $(O)
 endif
-	rm -rf $(BR2_CONFIG) $(CONFIG_DIR)/.config.old
 $(CONFIG_DIR)/..config.tmp \
+	rm -rf $(BR2_CONFIG) $(CONFIG_DIR)/defconfig
 $(CONFIG_DIR)/.config.old $(CONFIG_DIR)/..config.tmp \
 		$(CONFIG_DIR)/.auto.deps

help:
--
1.7.10.4

_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot at busybox.net
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

#2 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 Handle defconfig as .config in .gitignore and distclean.

Hi Jeremy,

Thanks for reviewing!

people are told to work with a clone of buildroot and adding defconfig

Quoted 3 lines

to gitignore means that ther is a high chance of not adding it to git
and loosing it...

You are right in this context, but .config is also in .gitignore, which also shouldn't be there if a custom repo is used.
I think .gitignore should be tuned to the git repo currently used - buildroot's own repo in the vanilla BR case.

Best regards,
Karoly
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20150520/a35097b0/attachment.html>

#3 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 Handle defconfig as .config in .gitignore and distclean.

K?roly, All,

I'm trying to review the oldest patches still pending, and here's it's the turn of your patch. ;-)

On 2015-05-20 13:13 +0200, K?roly Kasza spake thusly:

Quoted 8 lines

people are told to work with a clone of buildroot and adding defconfig

Quoted 2 lines

to gitignore means that ther is a high chance of not adding it to git
and loosing it...

You are right in this context, but .config is also in .gitignore, which also shouldn't be there if a custom repo is used.
I think .gitignore should be tuned to the git repo currently used - buildroot's own repo in the vanilla BR case.

Unlike Jeremy, I'm perfectly fine with defconfig in .gitignore. It's the distclean part I'm more concerned with.

On the one hand, it does make sense to remove it like we do remove .config. After all, the user is king, and if he wants to remove everything, why should we keep it? ;-)

On the other hand, I would see defconfig as really the quintessence of the configuration, which the user explicitly saved. They could get quite surprised if we now remove that file.

So, I'm a bit skeptical either way: keep it or remove it, I am unsure. Let's lean toward the safe side, and ket's just keep it, for users that were used to that behaviour, OK?

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

Signature · 6 lines
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
#4 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 Handle defconfig as .config in .gitignore and distclean.

Hello,

Quoted 7 lines · Yann E. MORIN

Unlike Jeremy, I'm perfectly fine with defconfig in .gitignore. It's the distclean part I'm more concerned with.

On the one hand, it does make sense to remove it like we do remove .config. After all, the user is king, and if he wants to remove everything, why should we keep it? ;-)

Quoted 7 lines

On the other hand, I would see defconfig as really the quintessence of the configuration, which the user explicitly saved. They could get quite surprised if we now remove that file.

So, I'm a bit skeptical either way: keep it or remove it, I am unsure. Let's lean toward the safe side, and ket's just keep it, for users that were used to that behaviour, OK?

Since the defconfig file name is configurable (by means of BR2_DEFCONFIG), I don't think we should do anything special with it. So I don't think it should be in .gitignore and I don't think we should remove it upon "make distclean".

If we were do "rm -f $(BR2_DEFCONFIG)" to always remove the user configured defconfig, then it would remove configs/<foo>_defconfig if you started from that defconfig and do a "make distclean". Not good. And we can't have user-configurable file names in .gitignore I believe.

So I'm personally in favor of keeping things as they are today, and therefore reject the patch proposed by K?roly.

Best regards,

Thomas

Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
#5 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 Handle defconfig as .config in .gitignore and distclean.

Thomas, K?roly, All,

On 2015-12-28 09:20 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni spake thusly:

Quoted 22 lines · Yann E. MORIN
Quoted 8 lines

Unlike Jeremy, I'm perfectly fine with defconfig in .gitignore. It's the distclean part I'm more concerned with.

On the one hand, it does make sense to remove it like we do remove .config. After all, the user is king, and if he wants to remove everything, why should we keep it? ;-)

Quoted 7 lines

On the other hand, I would see defconfig as really the quintessence of the configuration, which the user explicitly saved. They could get quite surprised if we now remove that file.

So, I'm a bit skeptical either way: keep it or remove it, I am unsure. Let's lean toward the safe side, and ket's just keep it, for users that were used to that behaviour, OK?

Since the defconfig file name is configurable (by means of BR2_DEFCONFIG), I don't think we should do anything special with it. So I don't think it should be in .gitignore and I don't think we should remove it upon "make distclean".

Quoted 7 lines

If we were do "rm -f $(BR2_DEFCONFIG)" to always remove the user configured defconfig, then it would remove configs/<foo>_defconfig if you started from that defconfig and do a "make distclean". Not good. And we can't have user-configurable file names in .gitignore I believe.

So I'm personally in favor of keeping things as they are today, and therefore reject the patch proposed by K?roly.

That's fine with me. I'll mark it rejected, then.

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

Signature · 6 lines
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'