[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: testsuite: work around autoconf 2.63b bug

From: Joel E. Denny
Subject: Re: testsuite: work around autoconf 2.63b bug
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 08:57:17 -0400 (EDT)

Hi Eric,

On Wed, 8 Apr 2009, Eric Blake wrote:

> According to Eric Blake on 4/8/2009 7:19 AM:
> > OK, I'll take some time today to mock up an approach, taking notes of what
> > I did to make explaining it easier, and post the results to my clone at
> > for review.  If you like how it looks,
> > we can then push it to savannah.

Thanks for taking the time to do this.  I get the concept now, and I may 
like to try it in the future.  However...

> But to date, we haven't done that.  So we need a
> one-time merge to establish that each older branch is a subset of the
> newer; here, the merge --strategy=ours says to make the merge but change
> no file contents (otherwise we would get merge conflicts).  This is a
> one-time operation, if we subsequently follow the branch paradigm.
> $ git merge --strategy=ours branch-2.4.2
> Already up-to-date.
> $ git checkout master
> Switched to branch "master"
> $ git merge --strategy=ours branch-2.5
> Merge made by ours.

I don't like the effect this has on git log for our current branches.  
Too many commits show up duplicated, and some log entries don't make sense 
for master.

Once branch-2.4.2 and branch-2.5 become inactive, we'll have a fresh start 
at this approach, and maybe we can get it right then.

In the meantime, would you push your patch separately to each of those 
branches?  I can do it if you're busy.

Thanks for your help.  I've definitely learned more about git.

reply via email to

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