[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] NEW: three-way merges / conflict markers

From: Alexander Deruwe
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] NEW: three-way merges / conflict markers
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:32:43 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.4i

On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 10:45:32AM -0700, Tom Lord wrote:
> arch has traditionally indicated conflicts by generating .rej files
> containing hunks that `patch(1)' rejects.
> Sometimes people ask, instead, to have diff3 or CVS style conflict
> markers left in the file being patched.   Like:
>       <<<<<<< TREE
>         this is what
>         you had in your tree
>         =======
>       this is what the merged-from
>         revision had instead
>         >>>>>>> MERGED-FROM
> With the head revision of tla--devo--1.1, you can get that style of
> merge with:
>       % tla star-merge -t  MERGED-FROM-REV
> or 
>       % tla star-merge --three-way  MERGED-FROM-REV
> It's probably worth pointing out that `star-merge', especially with
> the `-t' option, is an alternative to both `update' and `replay' for
> catching up to changes in your default tree version.  In other words,
> there isn't a real reason to add a `-t' option to `update' or `replay'
> -- just use `star-merge' instead.  (On the other hand, I wouldn't
> reject patches that turn `update -t' and `replay -t' into a call to
> `star-merge'.)

Any chance of getting a -t option in 'tla redo'?  The conflict markers
are much easier to work with, and I just found myself wishing 'redo'
would support them as well.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]