Re: using "core" as directory name
Tue, 18 Jul 1995 16:46:36 -0400 (EDT)

> > I have recently got the 1.3.8 kernel sources - it uses the name
> > "core" for a directory (linux/net/core), I use cvs and this causes
> > it some problems because it ignores some files this can be changed
> > on the command line etc (although cvs is being stubborn at the
> > moment) but it would make life easier if the name was changed (I've
> > used "ncore").
> Why? It's a bug in CVS that should be fixed *there*, not worked
> around here. At the very least CVS should allow the default ignore
> list to be ignored, should do type checking (file, directory, link,
> device) on matches, and should possibly call file(1) to see if that's
> really a core file (for example) at all.
> Instead of renaming any directory named "core", please mail a bug
> report to the CVS team at <> about this. I Cc'ed
> them this message.

No, the file name "core" has pretty specific meaning, and CVS is
probably not wrong. It seems extremely unwise to name anything
important "core", if only because people write scripts that find and
remove such files.

   - David A. Holland             | Peer pressure (n.): The force from the    | eyeballs of everybody watching you.