Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: >> Good to catch these cruft. >> >> Does the equivalent of "make distclean" need to be updated to clean >> them as well, or is it sufficient to ignore the build procedure and >> just rely on "git clean -f -x"? > > Since CMake in conjunction with Visual Studio completely side-steps > `make`, I think it would make most sense to ignore `make distclean` in > this context and go for `git clean -dfx` instead. I think you misunderstood the question, overlooking the "equivalent" part. I expected that when CMake & VS discards build artifacts, it would not make literal use of "make distclean". After all, it does not use "make all" to build, either. That led me to suspect that CMake & VS may have a build target that is used to discard build artifacts, the moral equivalent to "make distclean". That is where my question "if we are making .gitignore aware of more crufts, don't we need to tell the machinery, which is equivalent to 'make disclean', came from. What I am hearing here is that people with CMake & VS use "git clean -dfx" when they want to go back to the pristine state, unlike those who use "make distclean", and there is nothing to adjust for newly discovered crufts we are leaving on the filesystem. If that is the case, it is 100% fine. It was that I just didn't expect not having a "remove cruft" rule in the build procedure. Thanks.
