Closed mdmallardi closed 8 years ago
I've been told by @Ragora before that the Linux executable has to be named something other than OpenTESArena
to avoid a name collision with something else (presumably the OpenTESArena
folder)? However, I would like to use the full name for the executable at some point just for consistency with the project name. This is not an issue on Windows, though.
I assume that GCC drops the executable in the top directory then? Maybe it should go in a build directory instead to fix this name collision? What are your thoughts?
The cmake build system does drop the binary right in the root directory, calling it 'TESArena', instead of OpenTESArena. (Hence why I have that ignored) I did forget one CMake artifact that should be ignored: 'install_manifest.txt' (Only generated when someone runs 'make install') I personally think that it's fine, except for the fact that I think everyone would prefer an amount of consistancy between platform builds with the binary naming conventions. In that case, certainly dropping the binary into a build/ subdirectory, and then just ignoring that subdirectory would be preferable.
Maybe the addition of a build directory could be done in another pull request, and the .gitignore can be revised again at that time. I'd do it myself if I knew more about accepted CMake practices, but I don't at the moment.
This commit adds all current CMake artifacts and the final Linux binary to .gitignore, so these will no longer be attempted to be indexed.