Hi Eric, thanks for the feedback. On 05/10/2013 05:03 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 05/10/2013 08:59 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> This is just a trick to facilitate the resolution of conflicts in >> the upcoming merge of the master branch, where the to-level Makefile > > s/to-/top-/ > Sorry, but I have already performed the merge fixing all the spurious conflicts, so I'd rather not re-do that only to fix this minor typo.
>> has been broken up in several per-subdir makefiles fragments (that >> are then included by the top-level one, thus keeping the build system >> non-recursive). >> >> * Makefile.sav: New, verbatim copy of the "old" Makefile.am. >> * Makefile.am: Make it a symlink to Makefile.sav. >> >> Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini <[email protected]> >> --- >> Makefile.am | 709 >> +---------------------------------------------------------- >> Makefile.sav | 708 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 709 insertions(+), 708 deletions(-) >> mode change 100644 => 120000 Makefile.am >> create mode 100644 Makefile.sav > > Any reason why git rename detection is not showing this as a rename? > Yes, because I made Makefile.am a symlink to Makefile.sav. I thought I could keep the tree in a bootstrappable state during all the transition, but that turned out to be trickier, so I gave up on the attempt (too much trouble for a little gain). That made this step of symlink Makefile.am utterly useless in retrospect. Oh well, not a really big deal, certainly not worth rebasing and re-performing the merge IMO. Regards, Stefano
