Re: Question on rerere

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

 



Hi,

On Tue, 19 Dec 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:
> >
> >> IIUC then each conflict hunk is handled _separately_ like this: the 
> >> lexicographically smaller between the two file sections is displayed 
> >> first, regardless if a previous hunk had a different order. Not that it 
> >> matters most of the time, but isn't this dangerous?
> >
> > You are probably right.  Probably the right thing would be to
> > use the first hunk to determine the flipping order and stick to
> > that for the rest.
> >
> > Not that I've seen problems with the current behaviour, though.
> 
> Well, come to think of it, I think the current behaviour makes
> more sense.
> 
> Suppose you start from an original file "OO".  You have two
> branches that change it to "AO" and "BO", and another pair of
> branches that change it to "OC" and "OD".  Let's call these
> branches A, B, C, and D.
> 
> By merging A and C, you will get "AC"; you can get "AD", "BC"
> and "BD" the same way.
> 
> Now suppose you are on "AC" and merged "BD".  You would get
> "<A=B><C=D>".
> 
> If you were on "BD" and merged "AC" you would get "<B=A><D=C>".
> If you were on "AD" and merged "BC" you would get "<A=B><D=C>".
> 
> You got the idea?

Yes. Thanks!

Ciao,
Dscho

-
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]