On 18/08/06, Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> writes:
> In StGIT I can configure the merge command and I currently use the
> attached script (I need to add it to the StGIT repository). It tries
> diff3 first and, if that fails, invokes emacs' merge (can use xxdiff
> as well). It also checks whether the file was modified in case I want
> to exit and solve the conflict later (maybe after getting conflict
> information for the other files).
Thanks. That is interesting. However, the workflow Martin
wants to use this is a bit different from this. He wants
regular diff3/merge to leave conflicted result and have "xxdiff
-U" to sort out the resulting mess (I do that manually myself
but without any wrapper).
The problem with this approach is that you lose the ancestor
information. You want "diff3 -E" command to not report conflicts if
the changes are the same but the output no longer has the ancestor
information. The -A option would keep the ancestor (and use "xxdiff
--unmerge3" instead) but it always reports a conflict even if the
changes are the same. Are there any diff3 options I missed?
That's why I prefer to explicitely pass the 3 files to either emacs or xxdiff.
> # default merger
> if os.system('diff3 -L current -L ancestor -L patched -m -E '
> '"%s" "%s" "%s" > "%s"'
> % (branch1, ancestor, branch2, output)):
> # interactive merge
> if os.path.exists(output):
> mtime = os.path.getmtime(output)
> else:
> mtime = 0
I wonder why you do not error out when "if os.path.exists(output)"
does not hold true; you are redirecting into it, so the possibilities
are:
You are right. I was thinking about the file removed in the current
branch but modified in the other. However, this would never invoke
diff3.
Thanks.
--
Catalin
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html