One other thing. Is this expected?
$ darcs init
$ touch a b
$ darcs record -A email -m test -l a
Recording changes in "a":
addfile ./a
Shall I record this change? (1/?) [ynWsfqadjkc], or ? for help: y
Finished recording patch 'test'
$ cat _darcs/patches/pending
{
addfile ./b
}
It seems incorrect that the addfile for b should end up in pending...
Brian Ericson wrote:
> Odd. My message got truncated somehow. The following is what I'd
> intended to send and what's in my "sent" folder:
>
> I should have thought to grep _darcs! The files are listed in pending as
> {
> addfile ...
> .
> .
> }
>
> I see that if I "darcs record -l" and specify "n" for "addfile", that
> they get
> added to pending. Specifying "w" for "addfile" forces me to view the "hunk"
> for the file as well, but keeps the addfile/hunk out of pending. I'm
> not sure
> what I think of this... I realize I got myself into this by mixing
> source with
> artifacts (and not updating my boring file), but I wonder if either
> alternative
> makes as much/more sense:
> o Adding a "b" option for addfile changes that updates the boring file to
> include the new file and doesn't alter pending
> o Having "n" on addfile not touch pending.
>
> Thanks for your help! This was really annoying me! :)
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> I should have thought to grep _darcs! The files are listed in pending as
>> {
>> addfile ...
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> darcs-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
>>
>>
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
