>> 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.
>These scripts are also broken. If you want to stop core files try using
>limit coresize 0. I could just about forgive CVS getting core wrong [so
>much for platform independance] if it didnt do totally stupid things like
>not spotting core as file v core as directory. It should either keep its nose
>out of the business or be educated first.
Nonetheless, have a directory named core will prevent, for example, core
files from being generated in that directory.
In order to follow the theory of least-surprise, I'd say that especially
in a development environment as the kernel, you shouldn't have
files/directories being part of the source tree that are named "core".
--
Sincerely, srb@cuci.nl
Stephen R. van den Berg (AKA BuGless).
"And now for something *completely* different!"