Re: cg-update with local uncommitted changes

From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
Date: May 30, 2005, 19:19 UTC
Message-ID: <1117480796.7072.204.camel@pegasus>
In-Reply-To: <20050530183932.GB10439@pasky.ji.cz>

Hi Petr,

Show 26 quoted lines

> > when doing a cg-update and I have local uncommitted changes it fails
> > with the "... needs update" message. From some previous posts on the
> > mailing list I got the impression that it is possible to pull updates
> > into the local repository with changed files. At the moment I am using
> > the following sequence:
> > 
> > 	cg-diff > patch
> > 	cg-cancel
> > 	cg-update origin
> > 	cat patch | patch -p1
> > 	rm patch
> > 
> > The problem with this sequence is when I have added or removed files
> > from my repository. This needs a lot of manual fixing.
> > 
> > With Bitkeeper it was possible to pull changes as long as they don't
> > affect local uncommitted files.
> > 
> > Any ideas on how to implement or if it exists on how to use it?
> 
> does it really fail? "... needs update" is not an error but something
> between informative and warning message. (I've just committed a change
> which silences it in this case.)
> 
> If the update did indeed fail, could you show the complete output,
> please?

I used the latest cg-update on a test repository and now it works, but I found odd cases when I have files added/deleted that are not committed yet. For the added case I saw this:

Warning: uncommitted local changes, trying to bring them forward
The next patch would create the file test.c,
which already exists!  Skipping patch.
1 out of 1 hunk ignored -- saving rejects to file test.c.rej
Adding file test.c

I also think that it would be great if we cancel the merge if the local changes conflict with the files in the merge. This is how Bitkeeper does it and I think it is the only safe way, because if something fails or rejects we may destroy the local changes.

Regards

Marcel