Hi David, On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 06:43:31 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > mkdir repo1; cd repo1; darcs init; cd .. > > darcs get repo1 repo2 > > cd repo1; echo "one" > file; darcs add file; darcs record -a -m 'one'; > cd .. > > cd repo2; echo "two" > file; darcs add file; darcs record -a -m 'two' > > darcs pull -a > > > Where do I find a copy of the file containing "one", and/or information > > about what change conflicted there, so I can decide whether to keep my > > version of "file," use the pulled version of "file," or do some merge of > > the two? > > You don't. This is a serious bug in Darcs with the backward- > compatible repo formats (--old-inventory-format and --hashed). (It's > new to me, and I don't know if it's an old but unknown bug or a > regression.)
I may be mistaken when I say this, but I reckon this sort of thing is a UI issue and not a patch-theory one (if this is of any consolation). Do you think it would be feasible for conflicting adds to be marked up sensibly? I.e. in the working directory, one of the adds happens (seems easy), and both hunks get thrown in on top (maybe not so easy?) Or maybe you'd prefer just leaving it as it is since the darcs-2 format fixes it? -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
pgpkyUAvmIHCB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
