I've got a version of read-tree which accepts multiple ancestors and does
a merge using information from all of them.
The basic features are that it looks for an ancestor which would permit a
trivial merge, and uses that. However, if it finds ancestors which permit
different trivial merges, it does not merge (which I call case #16).
In case #16, I'm not sure what I should produce. I think the best thing
might be to not leave anything in stage 1. The desired end effect is that
the user is given a file with a section like:
{
*t = NULL;
*m = 0;
<<<<<<<<
return Z_DATA_ERROR;
========
return Z_OK;
>>>>>>>>
}
In other news, the merge that was giving Len Brown problems a while ago
turns out to have the above conflict, and he happened to end up doing the
right thing and not reverting Linus's revert of an unnecessary (but
harmless) change. I only noticed this just now, when I was testing that
merge, and got it to generate only two conflicts regardless of order of
ancestors (didn't try to resolve the other one, drivers/acpi/osl.c, with
"merge" either way).
So this test is encouraging: I get fewer non-trivial cases than either of
the ancestors alone gives, and I catch a case that both single ancestors
gets wrong.
Note that there are still some memory leaks for me to fix, but that's the
only flaw I know of with this.
Patches against mainline to follow shortly.
-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
