Re: Bad merging with stgit or git

From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org>
Date: Mar 21, 2006, 20:18 UTC
Message-ID: <1142972313.4749.123.camel@praia>
In-Reply-To: <20060321193924.GD14579@fieldses.org>

Em Ter, 2006-03-21 às 14:39 -0500, J. Bruce Fields escreveu:

Show 8 quoted lines

> On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 04:34:13PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > It shouldn't have any conflicts here for Linus, since those patches came
> > from his tree.
> 
> What do you mean by "those patches came from his tree"?  If you're
> actually cherry-picking patches from his tree and applying them to
> yours, then you're not reproducing the same commits he has--you're just
> creating new commits that happen to have nearly identical content.

No, I'm not cherry-picking his patches.

>From the discussions on git IRC, I think it may be caused by a bad

procedure when solving a conflict, after merging from Linus tree.

>From what I'm understanding now, I should do, when a conflict is

detected:

nano <files> git-update-index <files> git commit

Previously (at git 1.1.4), I was doing: nano <files> git commit <files>

git 1.2.4 don't allow this bad commit syntax anymore.

> 
> --b.

Cheers, Mauro.