Re: Contents of non-rootfs partitions

[Patrick Ohly <patrick.ohly@intel.com>]

On Thu, 2016-11-24 at 16:51 +0200, Ed Bartosh wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 03:43:18PM +0100, Kristian Amlie wrote:
> > On 24/11/16 14:23, Ed Bartosh wrote:
> > > Would this way be less intuitive?
> > > --exclude-path data/*
> > > --exclude-path data
> > > 
> > > We can go even further with it allowing any level of directories:
> > > --exclude-path data/tmp/*

Just to clarify, that is meant to also match data/tmp/.hidden-file,
right? I.e. fnmatch() without the special FNM_PERIOD flag.

> > > --exclude-path data/db/tmp
> > > ...
> > 
> > I agree, this is pretty unambiguous and easy to understand.
> > 
> > But this raises the question: Should we go all the way and support
> > wildcards? Which might make it a bit complicated. Maybe support only
> > pure '*' for now?
> 
> As it shouldn't be hard to implement I'd go for it.

Additional code implies additional testing. Remember that it also should
better be supported by mkfs.ext4 and friends.

I'd rather start simple and only add additional complexity when needed.

-- 
Best Regards, Patrick Ohly

The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although
I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way
represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak
on behalf of Intel on this matter.