[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So I have another anomaly in my GIT tree. A patch to
back out a bogus change to arch/ia64/hp/sim/boot/bootloader.c
in my release branch at commit
62d75f3753647656323b0365faa43fc1a8f7be97
appears to have been lost when I merged the release branch to
the test
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So I have another anomaly in my GIT tree. A patch to
back out a bogus change to arch/ia64/hp/sim/boot/bootloader.c
in my release branch at commit
62d75f3753647656323b0365faa43fc1a8f7be97
appears to have been
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Basically, he had two branches, A and B, and both contained the same patch
(but _not_ the same commit). One undid it, the other did not. There's no
real way to say which one is correct, and both cases clearly merge
perfectly, so both outcomes
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Now, if the shared patch hadn't been a patch, but a shared _commit_, then
the thing would have been unambiguous - the shared commit would have been
the merge point, and the revert would have clearly undone that shared
commit.
Actually, it was a
I think git did the right thing, it just happened to be the thing that
Tony didn't want. Which makes it the wrong thing, of course, but from a
purely technical standpoint, I don't think there's anything really wrong
with the merge.
On the plus side ... at least it wasn't a dumb user error this
* Even if it does always choose the nicer choice of the two,
Tony was lucky (no pun intended). Rather, we were lucky that
Tony was observant. A careless merger may well have easily
missed this mismerge (from the human point of view).
Actually I can't take credit here. This was a
So I have another anomaly in my GIT tree. A patch to
back out a bogus change to arch/ia64/hp/sim/boot/bootloader.c
in my release branch at commit
62d75f3753647656323b0365faa43fc1a8f7be97
appears to have been lost when I merged the release branch to
the test branch at commit
I'm at home, and too lazy to log in to work to look at my tree. But I
have a theory
as to what went wrong for me.
At the start I had a file, same contents in test and release branch.
I applied a patch to release, and pulled to test. So the contents are still
the same, both with the patch
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Tony Luck wrote:
So GIT decides that the test branch has had a patch, and the release
branch hasn't ... and so it merges by keeping the version in test.
Plausible?
Very. Sounds like what happened.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
9 matches
Mail list logo
