2012/9/13 Eric Kow <[email protected]> > Do I understand correctly that > > - you were offered two patches S and B > - patch S was your source code change > - patch B was your build script change > - that patch S was offered before B > - when you accepted S, B was automatically accepted as well without giving > you recourse? >
This how I remember. > > If so, that is not normal. The behaviour I would expect is > > - it offers B first > - if you reject B, it does not offer S > Hmm... in darcs 2.4 if I remember correctly darcs autoincluded patches that were dependencies. So it asked about patch [1/2], then knew that [2/2] has to be in because of dependencies and darcs did not ask about it. The dependency was probably real in textual sense: spaces at the end of lines or tab-to-spaces. The issues is that it was not shown. > I'm trying to think of possible ways the behaviour I think you reported > could arise. > By any chance were you using the --reverse flag? > No. > > Are you still using Darcs enough that you can dig up an example? > I do not think so... > > Thanks, > > -- > Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> > PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9 >
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
