auto commit merge using the default merge message

so I do the same merge all the time... sorta, I'm not sure rerere would actually work because the file is different each time... I just have to delete it each time. and I want to automate the process. checkout merge rm commmit, problem is commit brings and editor up, I want to commit with the 'auto inserted merge message' that is generated, without seeing the editor, how do I do this?

2009/4/23 Caleb Cushing <xenoterracide@gmail.com>:

See git commit -C <commit-with-fitting-description>, git commit -F <message-file> and git commit -m "message text".

Alex Riesen venit, vidit, dixit 23.04.2009 09:57:

I think he wants the auto generated message which may be different for each merge. Maybe something like

GIT_EDITOR=/bin/true git commit

will do the trick.

Michael

Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> writes:

Use "GIT_EDITOR=:" instead. It also is *true* just like /bin/true, but git knows a simple magic about this and avoids an extra fork+exec.

A similar trick exists for GIT_PAGER=cat (not "/bin/cat"), by the way.

Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 23.04.2009 10:32:

Good to know!

So, GIT_PAGER=cat differs from GIT_PAGER=/bin/cat even when `which cat`==/bin/cat?

Michael

On Apr 23, 2009, at 5:07 AM, Michael J Gruber wrote:

Yes, if $GIT_PAGER == "cat", then git won't launch a pager at all. If $GIT_PAGER == "/bin/cat", then git will launch /bin/cat and pipe all of it's output through it. The result is (assuming a functional /bin/ cat) identical, but "cat" avoids the extra memory usage of "/bin/cat".

~~ Brian

On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 4:32 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

So I could put

GIT_EDITOR=:

at the top of my shell script, and then whenever I need to do a commit, just git commit and it'll work (assuming the commit has a default message).

On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 09:31:10PM -0400, Caleb Cushing wrote:

You need to also

  export GIT_EDITOR

for "git commit" to see it.

-Peff

On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 10:06 AM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:

maybe I'm being silly, but won't that then affect my interactive shells?

On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 01:50:57PM -0400, Caleb Cushing wrote:

No, because you're putting it in your shell script, not in your .profile (right?). The "export" command just tells the shell "pass this variable in the environment to any child processes you spawn". Without it, the variable is local to that shell.

-Peff