Re: [Q] merge squash unexpected conflicts
- From
- Cory Sharp <cory.sharp@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 14, 2009, 14:47 UTC
- Message-ID
- <bb9d69200905140747j60b2e09flaabbb4db09b371b4@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <4A0C0BDF.9020803@drmicha.warpmail.net>
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 5:17 AM, Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> wrote:
Show 36 quoted lines
> Cory Sharp venit, vidit, dixit 14.05.2009 05:57: >> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 8:21 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote: >>> Cory Sharp <cory.sharp@gmail.com> writes: >>> >>>> Am I doing something a little wrong or unexpected? Is there a way >>>> around this squash conflict behavior? This doesn't seem to happen >>>> with plain merge without squash. >>> >>> Of course. That's the whole point of recording a merge as a merge. >>> >> >> $ git help merge >> >> --squash >> Produce the working tree and index state as if a real merge >> happened. ... This allows you to create a >> single commit on top of the current branch whose effect is >> the same as merging another branch. > > The problem is simply in the "...". You cut out the vital part: > > > but do not actually make a commit or > move the `HEAD`, nor record `$GIT_DIR/MERGE_HEAD` to > cause the next `git commit` command to create a merge > commit. > > See? Tree: yes, index: yes, merge info: no. > > Git does perform a (tree) merge with --squash, but records the resulting > tree as an ordinary non-merge commit (with a single parent). > > I'm not sure whether the statement about the index is completely > correct, though. During a merge the index records info about the merge > (stages :1: etc.) but that as missing with --squash. Only the resulting > tree is added to the index. How about the below?
Now I see, thanks for the help. The elided part, at the time I elided it, did not make me understand that merge info was not written, particularly when surrounded by its original accompanying text.
Thanks again, Cory