Re: [PATCH 4/5] merge_recursive: Fix renames across paths below D/F conflicts

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 17:55, Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 7:36 AM, Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I cannot say much about your change... Are you sure about D/F conflict
>> detection, though? You just test if target mode not 0.
>
> Well, as far as this particular if-block is concerned, blame suggests
> that you and Miklos were responsible (I apologize if gmail screws up
> and inserts line wrapping)::

Don't just look at the blame output, look at what the commits actually changed.
It's either a reformatting or a trivial change.

> With D/F conflicts, the files would be loaded into higher stages in
> the index (before it gets to process_renames()), which I detected via
> a non-zero mode.

This just detects if there was any conflict. Not specifically D/F or F/D.

> If there's a different way I should be checking for higher stage entries
> that still need to be resolved, I'd be happy to use it.

I'd expect a check for a file-to-directory (or back) mode change.
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]