From: Rene Herman Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 10:58:10 GMT Subject: Re: git pull versus fetch/merge Message-ID: <48846BC2.4090407@keyaccess.nl> In-Reply-To: <20080721102320.GA19776@atjola.homenet> On 21-07-08 12:23, Björn Steinbrink wrote: > Your fetch/merge approach was different from what your pull approach > did. tiwai/devel did not get updated by the fetch, which means that > you tried to merge the old state of that branch and that caused some > conflicts. OTOH the pull did fetch the latest state from the remote > repo and merged that cleanly. > > Your fetch/merge approach was more like "git pull" without any > arguments, but with the current branch setup to track tiwai/devel. In > that case, pull really does a "git fetch tiwai", and it should fail > in the same way. Thank you. Also due to a reply on the ALSA list by Mark brown I now get this. Yes, the remote was rebased while I had it setup as a remote here it seems; only recently have it under this name, so I didn't think that was the case. After a "git remote rm tiwai, git remote add tiwai " things work fine again as it fetched a completely new branch. Hurray for rebasing public trees. This specific branch should be rebased only at every kernel release so I guess it's okay. I guess I can just do the git pull always, or the fetch every time and let the reject warn me that it was rebased after which I'll do the remote rm/add thing again. Many thanks for the concrete description of what goes on. Made it obvious. Rene.