Re: [RFH] straightening out "read-tree -m"
- From
Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
- Date
- Mar 19, 2007, 00:04 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7v1wjmnlop.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <45FDC95B.5020106@midwinter.com>
Steven Grimm <koreth@midwinter.com> writes:
Show 6 quoted lines
> On my to-do list for next week is to try to come up with a minimally > complex test case to demonstrate the problem, as the actual > repositories in question are pretty convoluted and there were a bunch > of other unrelated changes. I didn't mention it before now because I > knew my description was certain to be too vague to be useful without a > test case to look at.
You are free to come up with test case, but I have a feeling that the problem is already well understood (and that is why the last part of my RFH matters a lot more than the former "case table"). In short, "read-tree -m" (and unpack-trees) is screwy in the presense of D/F conflicts.