From: Ciaran <ciaranj@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 01 May 2011 22:08:24 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Pass empty file to p4merge where no base is suitable.
Message-ID: <BANLkTikv0YmB-u74sOrQUQZGQvYJNmBx_w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7v7haarsrd.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Ciaran <ciaranj@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> I suspect that you may be able to simply use "$BASE" for that, no?  It
>>> will be cleaned up when cleanup_temp_files() is run anyway (warning: I do
>>> not use mergetool, and I am writing this only from my cursory looking of
>>> the script, so take this with a large grain of salt).
>> I don't think so, the BASE file isn't created at-all in this scenario afaict.
>
> Hmm, just like $BASE, your .no-base is not created at all in this scenario
> either, but you create it yourself in your patch, and because you picked a
> new filename for that temporary file, you also need to worry about
> cleaning it up.
>
> Why can't that temporary file be "$BASE"?  That is what I was asking.
> Then you would still create an empty file (but see *1*), and can rely on
> existing codepaths to clean it up.
>
> IOW, wouldn't it be far simpler to turn the part you are patching into
> these three lines?
>
>        $base_present || >"$BASE"
>        "$merge_tool_path" "$BASE" "$LOCAL" "$REMOTE" "$MERGED"
>        check_unchanged

Yes, that is a *much* better solution that solves my issue perfectly
;) Patch to follow.

<!-- Snip -->

> [Footnote]
>
> *1* It also may be worth considering to employ the "use either an empty
>    file or use the common parts of merged files, whichever makes the
>    merge simpler, as a phony base" technique found in git-merge-one-file.
>
I did consider your earlier post on this, but it seems that that
perforce's merge client is sufficiently smart enough to do this
alignment/matching itself, so the effort isn't required (imho) for
this client (which is the client that I'm experiencing 'pain' with atm
!

Thanks,
- Cj.