# StGIT unhelpfulness

3 messages from 2007-05-22 to 2007-05-22. Participants: Petr Baudis, Karl Hasselström.
Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/8274

## Petr Baudis, 2007-05-22 11:16

Subject: StGIT unhelpfulness
Message-ID: <20070522111603.GH4489@pasky.or.cz>
URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20070522111603.GH4489%40pasky.or.cz

```
  Hi,

  I tried to stg pull to my git repository at repo.or.cz, but stg pull
only laconically announced

	stg pull: Rebasing would possibly lose data

and left me with a confused stare. The same with popping all the patches
first, so there is actually nothing _to_ rebase, but it still fails.

  Five minutes of peeking at the stgit code later, I think this is
because I sometimes do stg pull (now) and sometimes stg pop -a, cg
update, stg push -a when I'm feeling nostalgic. orig-base doesn't get
updated and stgit gets unhappy, but frankly, I don't even get _why_ does
it need to record and check orig-base - how does it matter?

  Besides, when it doesn't like it, it should give me some more helpful
error message than just the cryptic above...

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
Ever try. Ever fail. No matter. // Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
		-- Samuel Beckett

```

## Karl Hasselström, 2007-05-22 14:15

Subject: Re: StGIT unhelpfulness
Message-ID: <20070522141545.GA15546@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk>
URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20070522141545.GA15546%40diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk
In-Reply-To: <20070522111603.GH4489@pasky.or.cz>

```
On 2007-05-22 13:16:03 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote:

> stg pull: Rebasing would possibly lose data

I agree. I've also hit this problem, but with "stg rebase".

I just submitted a bug for this:

  https://gna.org/bugs/index.php?9181

-- 
Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com
      www.treskal.com/kalle

```

## Karl Hasselström, 2007-05-22 14:18

Subject: Re: StGIT unhelpfulness
Message-ID: <20070522141805.GB15546@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk>
URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20070522141805.GB15546%40diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk
In-Reply-To: <20070522141545.GA15546@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk>

```
On 2007-05-22 16:15:45 +0200, Karl Hasselström wrote:

> I agree.

... that the check is too strict.

-- 
Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com
      www.treskal.com/kalle

```