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

Re: Triggers status?



Raphael Hertzog writes ("Re: Triggers status?"):
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in lib/Makefile.am
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in lib/dbmodify.c
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in lib/dpkg.h
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in lib/ehandle.c
> CONFLICT (delete/modify): lib/fields.c deleted in HEAD and modified in debian-patch. Version debian-patch of lib/fields.c left in tree.
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in lib/parse.c
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in lib/tarfn.c
> CONFLICT (add/add): Merge conflict in lib/trigdeferred.l
> CONFLICT (add/add): Merge conflict in lib/triglib.c
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in src/Makefile.am
> CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in src/configure.c
> CONFLICT (add/add): Merge conflict in src/trigproc.c
> Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.

This is precisely what using a merge tracking drcs, used properly, is
supposed to avoid.  And it is exactly what my approach _does_ avoid.

If you just merge my patch into your head, I'll be able to pull from
your head into my flex branch without any spurious conflicts.

I just tried it and there's just one conflict in lib/parse.c which I
is an actual real conflict between some changes I made on the triggers
branch after my last merge into the flex branch.

Ian.



Reply to: