On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >> I do not recall people talking about symbolic links but the case of
> >> binary files has been on the wishlist for a long time, and I do not
> >> know of anybody who is working on (or is planning to work on) it.
> > Ah, I misremembered.
> > We've
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Junio C Hamano writes:
>
>> I do not recall people talking about symbolic links but the case of
>> binary files has been on the wishlist for a long time, and I do not
>> know of anybody who is working on (or is planning to work on)
Junio C Hamano writes:
> I do not recall people talking about symbolic links but the case of
> binary files has been on the wishlist for a long time, and I do not
> know of anybody who is working on (or is planning to work on) it.
Ah, I misremembered.
We've addressed the
Yaroslav Halchenko writes:
> yes it does. Thanks. And that is where I realized that I should have used -X
> theirs (not -s theirs), as the instruction on the option for the
> (recursive) merge. And now problem is more specific:
>
> - conflict within file content editing
On Mon, 25 Sep 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Yaroslav Halchenko writes:
> > d'oh, indeed there is no git-merge-theirs neither in debian pkg or a
> > freshly
> > built git and I found a rogue script in the PATH (which did nothing
> > apparently, sorry!). BUT I was
5 matches
Mail list logo