I realize that the output talks about 'apply', not push, but anyway this seems inconsistent to me. Note that I have not done 'darcs apply' in the first place. (Yes, I know that push is the same as send+apply. Still.)
My suggestion is that push should support at least one of these options. (Why are there two, BTW, and what, if any, is their difference?) b...@sarun[1]: .../seq/2-0-98 > darcs push ../work The remote repository has 4 patches to pull. Thu Mar 4 10:13:16 CET 2010 [email protected] tagged R2-0-12 Shall I push this patch? (1/15) [ynWvplxdaqjk], or ? for help: a darcs failed: Refusing to apply patches leading to conflicts. If you would rather apply the patch and mark the conflicts, use the --mark-conflicts or --allow-conflicts options to apply These can set as defaults by adding apply mark-conflicts to _darcs/prefs/defaults in the target repo. Backing up ./configure/RELEASE(-darcs-backup0) There are conflicts in the following files: ./configure/RELEASE Apply failed! b...@sarun[1]: .../seq/2-0-98 > darcs push ../work --mark-conflicts darcs failed: unrecognized option `--mark-conflicts' b...@sarun[1]: .../seq/2-0-98 > darcs push ../work --allow-conflicts darcs failed: unrecognized option `--allow-conflicts' b...@sarun[1]: .../seq/2-0-98 > darcs --version 2.4.1 (release) Cheers Ben _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
