I'm using Bazaar and Visual Studio 2010 in a C# project. I have prepared an ignore list but still I think all the files in Solution Output directory could be ignored.
I search a lot but nobody had mentioned it. So I'm going to know if I can ignore this directory because output files are changing regularly and seems are not important for repository copy.
What do you suggest about this issue ?
In general, any file that is automatically generated by compiler or build tools should NOT be committed into source control. This includes object files, executables, generated resource files, symbols, etc. Committing those files does not serve any useful purpose. Also, sometimes there are configuration files which look like can be committed, but really should not if they only contain local user specific info - for Visual Studio there are *.user files.
By that logic, solution output folder should be always put into ignore list.
Related
I'm running VS Enterprise 2015. This infernal thing keeps wanting to add my solution's .vssscc file to version control. My .tfignore has this line:
*.vssscc
The other items in .tfignore are working fine, but for some reason this one is not. There are no other .tfignore files in the directory tree. Surely I'm overlooking something, but I'm pulling what's left of my hair out trying to figure out what. Any suggestions?
*.vssscc stands for Visual Studio Solution Source Control File
When a solution is added to source control, a corresponding .vssscc file is created. The text file contains connection information and an exclusion file list, similar to the project hint file. This file is temporary and exists only in the source control database.
As a rule of thumb, we'd recommend letting Visual Studio handle those files. It'll add to source control the files it needs and leave out those not needed.
.vssscc files also manage the solution bindings, so better to have them controlled (by VS) .
Also, visual studio can have problems with the source control bindings if the files it needs are not under source control.
I try to get familiar with version control systems (mercurial to be exact) - nearly everything works as it should, but I have trouble with Solution files of the Microsoft Visual Studio 2010 which contain several projects.
Things I add to the ignore list: Bin/debug/Object folders (of course), the .suo file and .csproj files.
Ignoring .csproj files does not seem to be the best idea since other users of my mercurial repository have problems when opening the vs solution: the included projects are "defect".
But including the csproj. files on the other hand also causes trouble as you can read on several pages, or am I wrong here?
What can I do? Thank you
Ignoring .suo files is a good idea since they contain specific user options.
Csproj files represent files defining projects in your solution. So solution defines a number of csproj files, and csproj files define what files/folders are contained withing the projects themselves. You absolutely have to add them to the repository.
I want to version my visual studio 2010 debug builds. I'm going to use git. Right now all the project files are in 'project' and the output binaries are put by visual studio in the directory 'project\debug'. I've read a few questions on here that have ignore lists for Visual Studio but most of them have an ignore list that ignores the binary files, like the obj exe idb pdb ilk etc.
If I want to be able to debug my exe in the future what files do I need to keep? Is there any reason to keep the obj files? Does VS use them at all during debugging or tracing a crash? I thought I should keep at least the the pdb files and the exe. So that would be project.exe, project.pdb and vc100.pdb. But what about vc100.idb, project.ilk, project.res... etc. Is there an ignore list that will ignore everything that isn't needed to keep binary builds but keep everything that is?
I want to make sure if a user sends me a crash dump or reports a problem at some point in the future that I can go back to the version that was being used and be able to debug it. I had also hoped to make the binaries and debug files available in a remote repo so that anyone else could as well. Thanks!
Don't keep binaries in version control. Instead, build from source.
Since the binaries are built from source, and you have the source versioned already, just re-build the particular version as-needed. It will both keep your version control system lean and fast, as well as not cause merge headaches (which binaries are notorious for).
So, the answer is don't keep any binaries in version control.
If you feel you really must keep them, however, then just zip them up and store them like normal files using the tag of the build they came from.
I'm going to keep project.exe and project.pdb in the branch. The other files like *.obj, *.ilk, and *.sdf are not needed. Neither are the vc100.* files. I made my decision after speaking to a number of people in person and reviewing this:
File Types Created for Visual C++ Projects
and this:
Which Visual C++ file types should be committed to version control?
Although that SO question/answer does not answer my question it gave me a lot of good information. I also looked through my project.pdb for all the file references to confirm which files in my project that I needed to keep around. I used this command from the debugging tools for windows:
srcsrv\srctool -r project.pdb
Here's my specific scenario: Using VS2010, Pex and TFS2008, generated moles files are getting automatically added to source-control (TFS).
Pex adds a "project_name.moles" file to your test project and then autogenerates 3 files at build time: project_name.Designer.cs, project_name.Moles.dll, and project_name.Moles.xml. I want to keep the *.moles files in TFS (it's source code) but I don't want the 3 generated files to be in TFS (they are still part of the project, but they are generated when first built on a new system).
There are two reasons I need this behavior:
1. It's not a good idea to store generated code in source-control (let's not debate the merits of that here).
2. Specially, the DLL file is BAD because every time someone builds, all moles files are regenerated and thus all files are checked-out and DLL files are checked-out EXCLUSIVELY (non-mergable) and so other people can no longer build on their local box.
The Pex/Moles team are working on this but the solution is still likely several months away.
Is there a csproj property that can be assigned to these project files so that they are in the project but not managed by version control? I don't mind hand-editing the csproj file.
Moles will not be adding any files to the project in the next version (v0.94). It will use MSBuild to generate the assemblies on demand.
I think it depends more on the version control tool than Visual Studio, as usually you can set up some kind of filters in your version control configuration in order to exclude some files/paths.
E.g. if you use Mercurial/Hg, you can (and should) edit your repository .hgignore file and specify e.g. to exclude all *.moles files and the whole sub-tree MolesAssemblies\*. I guess other version control systems have similar options.
I have a (C++) project that I originally developed under Linux using make to build it. I would like to also have it run in Windows and am using Visual Studio 2005 to build it. The problem I'm running into is that Visual Studio places all objects into the same output directory. This doesn't work for me because I have source files with the same name in different sub-directories. This means that the last object (with the common name) overwrites all previous ones and thus I get link errors for the "missing" code.
Setting the output directory (even using the Visual Studio variables like $(InputDir)) at the project level doesn't work because Visual Studio passes all of the source files to cl.exe at once (i.e. $(InputDir) is evaluated once rather than for each input file). It appears that this problem can be solved by manually setting the output directory for each file (at a minimum, for the affected files), but this is less than optimal and error-prone.
Is there a better way to solve this problem? I would even appreciate it even if someone is able to suggest a way to get Visual Studio to compile files one-at-a-time so that setting the output directory at the project level would have the desired effect.
You might consider using different project for each directory or so. Otherwise, using the exactly same filename within a certain project might seem a bit strange. (Sort of a hierarchy within the project structure; something I've never seen before anyway.)