Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
>
>> Am Dienstag, 26. Februar 2008 schrieb Tom Lane:
>>
>>>> Why should it complain more or less than about the SUBSYS.o
>>>> files?
>>>>
>>> It has a hard-wired rule not to complain about files named *.o.
>>>
>
>
>> Well, we could name the output file SUBSYS.o if that is not too confusing. :)
>>
>
> Yeah, it probably is. D'Arcy's suggestion of modifying our
> CVSROOT/cvsignore file seems better.
>
>
+1. Calling it something like foo.o when it isn't an object file would
be horrible. This should be a simple one-off operation.
cheers
andrew
