Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] diff markers/ star merge
From: Zenaan Harkness <zen@cashpoolcomps.com>
To: arch <gnu-arch-users@gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <41A112A4.4070207@panoramicfeedback.com>
References: <1101070919.6134.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<41A112A4.4070207@panoramicfeedback.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <1101076091.6134.82.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 09:28:11 +1100
Precedence: list
Sender: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org
Errors-To: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org
Status: RO
Content-Length: 2411
Lines: 74
On Mon, 2004-11-22 at 09:11, Aaron Bentley wrote:
> Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> 
> > So, I can tla undo, tla star-merge then tla redo, except when I tla redo
> > I get the .rej conflict files rather than diff3 in-file markers.
> 
> I realize that .rej files may be unfamiliar, but now that I'm used to 
> them, I find them quite readable.  The top half shows the text the patch 
> was expecting, the bottom shows what the patch tried to turn it into.
> 
> > Is there a way to play with my branches to achieve this (get the diff3
> > in-file markers when I re-do)?
> 
> AFAICT, there's no point in doing this.  If you star-merge directly, 
> you'll get the same thing,

But that's not quite what I need:

I have a month's work, I need to do a bit more work on it _before_
merging, but management is demanding a merge/release.

So, I want to undo, star-merge in $stable, then commit (!), then redo so
I can continue on. Except I want in-file diff3 markers when I redo,
because my change touches hundreds of files.

With so many files, it's a royal PITA to have to manually compare diff
.rej files with originals, locate the appropriate lines in the code, and
cut and paste between the .rej and the original.

Surely this makes sense? Or am I completely missing something?

>  except that the conflicts will point the 
> opposite way.  But they'll still be inline conflicts that point the 
> opposite way.
> 
> However, I think it goes like this:
> $TREE_REVISION=$(tla logs -f|tail -n 1)
> tla tag -S $TREE_REVISION $TEMP_VERSION
> tla replay $TEMP_VERSION--base-0
> tla commit -s "Temp copy of changes" $TEMP_VERSION
> tla apply-delta . $TREE_REVISION
> tla star-merge $UPSTREAM
> tla commit -s "Got latest upstream"
> tla star-merge -t $TEMP_VERSION

Hmm, thanks. I see how I go.

ta
zen

> The reason it's so complicated is that apply-delta doesn't have a 
> --three-way parameter.  Otherwise, it would just require a get and an 
> apply-delta.
> 
> Aaron
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gnu-arch-users mailing list
> Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users
> 
> GNU arch home page:
> http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
> 


_______________________________________________
Gnu-arch-users mailing list
Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users

GNU arch home page:
http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/