Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Finn Arne Gangstad <finnag@xxxxxxx> writes: > >>> > +cat >.gitignore <<EOF >>> >>> You probably want to use \EOF here. >> >> I am curious, does it matter? Most of the tests use EOF and not \EOF. > > If you want the same shell variable expansion and quoting rules as you get > inside double-quote pair, you would say <<EOF without any quotes. If you > quote the EOF, no such substitutions happen. > > In this particular case, you want what you typed there literally in the > file, so <<\EOF would be more correct, even though \# expands to \# > itself. > > IOW, your current list of patterns does not happen to have anything like > $var nor \\ that would make a difference, but to protect future breakages > by people adding more patterns there, it is better to say <<\EOF when you > know you are not asking for any funny expansion to be explicit. Oh, by the way, do we really want to add a new test script? I am wondering why the test is not an update to an existing test for the exclusion feature, such as t/t3001-ls-files-others-exclude.sh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
