Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> On 08/31/2012 03:57 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>>
>>> On 08/31/2012 03:34 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>>>> Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>>>>> These should go on the top of my other pending series "[PATCH 0/7] Minor
>>>>> cleanup and refactoring":
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/coreutils/2012-08/msg00205.html>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks! Looking at these now.
>>>> FYI, I pushed that other series an hour ago.
>>>>
>>> Ouch, some of them still have the S-o-B line! Can you delete those, or
>>> should I resend?
>>
>> No problem. As I tried to apply them with "git am FILE",
>> the new commit hook complained and left me in the editor,
>> where I removed them.
>>
>> However, 3/6 failed to apply.
>>
> Are you applying with "git am -3", right? Otherwise, merge conflicts that
> can be solved automatically won't be.
Yes. Here's what I hit with your original series
$ git am -3 k
Applying: maint: add our 'bootstrap_post_import_hook' function
Applying: build: refactor how lists of coreutils programs are defined
Applying: build: don't use recursive make to build the 'src' subdirectory
fatal: sha1 information is lacking or useless (cfg.mk).
Repository lacks necessary blobs to fall back on 3-way merge.
Cannot fall back to three-way merge.
Patch failed at 0003 build: don't use recursive make to build the 'src'
subdirectory
The copy of the patch that failed is found in:
/h/j/w/co/cu/.git/rebase-apply/patch
When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --resolved".
If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".
> Anyway, I can resend the series (now rebased on latest master) if that
> would make things easier ....
I worked around that problem, but as mentioned separately,
I'm seeing numerous make syntax-check problems, and for those
I would appreciate a re-spin.
