On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 07:30:23PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Uwe,
>
> On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 09:25:59 +0200 Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Long history short: James probably used -s ours or similar and it's fine
> > not to merge that commit into next :-)
>
> Ah ha! Thanks for the explanation. My mind was clearly not up to it
> today. :-)
The uncomfortable issue here is that
git show bcd05ca10420
(or gitk or gitweb or <enteryourfavoritetoolhere>) doesn't indicate that
it's "strange". The patch shown is simply empty, as it would be if the
tree matched the other parent or if it were a clean merge.
A flag would be nice that does what I did: redo the merge and compare
bcd05ca10420^{tree} with the result?
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
