Re: [PATCH] merge-recursive: tweak magic band-aid

From: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Date: Mar 21, 2011, 18:24 UTC
Message-ID: <AANLkTik8qaiu0NeM4oyuOvWXtw5QzamQxoyENAUsQxj3@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7v1v250xnr.fsf_-_@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Hi,

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> Running checks against working tree (e.g. lstat()) and causing
> changes to working tree (e.g. unlink()) while building a virtual
> ancestor merge does not make any sense. Avoid doing so.
>
> This is not a real fix; it is another magic band-aid on top of
> another band-aid we placed earlier.
>
> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

Sorry for not responding sooner; thanks for fixing this up, though. Also, I have to apologize for having left a bunch of changes on my harddrive for several months; one of those changes includes the first half of your patch (which I should have remembered and not made the problem worse with my more recent patch submission.) I just never got around to cleaning up those changes and getting them submitted. Maybe I should just send what I do have for now, and then send the cleaned up version when I get a good chunk of time in another month or two.

>   merge-recursive is riddled with places that touch/inspect working tree
>   when it shouldn't, and it is beyond salvage without a major refactoring
>   in its current shape, so this magic band-aid should do for now.

Yeah, I agree this needs to be fixed up. If no one else takes a look, I'll try to when I get back to my other changes.