Re: Documentation Bugs

From: Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@informatik.uni-freiburg.de>
Date: May 7, 2007, 12:58 UTC
Message-ID: <20070507125837.GA16370@informatik.uni-freiburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <20070506130921.GA3750@lala>

Hello,

Show 24 quoted lines

> 2) rebase a merged tree:
> 
>    If I made a local commit and pulled from origin, I get:
> 
> 	zeisberg@cassiopeia:~/gsrc/git$ git show
> 	commit 15386213004a20dfdf92c654c737795079202545
> 	Merge: 9d740f0... 9159afb...
> 	Author: Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@informatik.uni-freiburg.de>
> 	Date:   Sun May 6 14:49:59 2007 +0200
> 
> 	    Merge branch 'master' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/git/git
> 
> 	zeisberg@cassiopeia:~/gsrc/git$ git rebase junio/master
> 	Current branch master is up to date.
> 
>    (where junio/master is the tracking branch for
>    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/git/git) but git-rebase(1) states:
> 
> 	All changes made by commits in the current branch but that are
> 	not in <upstream> are saved to a temporary area. This is the
> 	same set of commits that would be shown by git log
> 	<upstream>..HEAD.
> 
>    and git-log junio/master..HEAD is not empty.

After having thought about that one once more, here some more info: The two patches I had in master were merged in the meantime. So it was correct for git-rebase to state that master is up to date. Rereading the documentation I realize there is no bug. I just missed that both patches were already merged and format-patch generated a patch anyhow.

The first issue remains however.

Best regards Uwe

-- 
Uwe Kleine-König

If a lawyer and an IRS agent were both drowning, and you could only save
one of them, would you go to lunch or read the paper?