From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 19:40:00 GMT
Subject: Re: Struggling with tangled
Message-ID: <ek28vh$f6f$1@sea.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <200611221915.59073.alan@chandlerfamily.org.uk>

Alan Chandler wrote:

> On Wednesday 22 November 2006 11:01, Jakub Narebski wrote:
>> Alan Chandler wrote:

>>> 3) I sometime hit a merge conflict in a file which I know will actually
>>> be deleted at the tip of the topic I am rebasing.  Is there a way at this
>>> point to just tell the conflict resolution to say make this file go away.
>>
>> "git rm <filename>" plus "git update-index <filename>" doesn't work?
> 
> Well I _thought_ I tried git-update-index --remove and that hadn't worked.

I think "git update-index --force-remove" might be needed here.

>>> 4) I repeat the question I asked in a thread above.  What is the --merge
>>> switch on git-rebase actually do.  The man page starts talking about
>>> merge strategies, but there already is a -s switch for that.
>>
>> "git rebase" uses "git format-patch" + "git-am --3way" machinery by
>> default. The --merge option makes it use merge machinery instead (similar
>> to the way "git checkout -m" uses merge strategy IIRC).
> 
> Yes but ...
> 
> ... what does that mean in usage terms?
> 
> Why would I want to use one rather than the other?

Merge machinery can detect renames. I don't know if merge machinery supports
skipping over commits. The format-patch/am --3way machinery was first (and
is default).
-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git