On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 7:29 AM, Stephan Beal <sgb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 4:22 PM, arnoldemu < > mem...@arnoldemu.freeserve.co.uk> wrote: > >> kdiff3 makes it hard work, I must go and resolve every little thing >> including whitespace and empty lines. Merging multiple lines is hard work. >> So often I've given up and choose a different approach. >> > check your call to kdiff3 against the example in the help: kdiff3 "%baseline" "%original" "%merge" -o "%output" Next, get to know the buttons to navigate the conflicts. The double stacked triangles pointing down should take you to the next unresolved conflict. Click A, B, C or some combination to resolve the conflict and or manually edit the text. There are several video tutorials available. This is the first one that came up for me and it seems comprehensive for getting going: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CkqiIPAzgQ Meld is a fantastic tool for manually moving changes across directory trees but I find it inadequate for 3-way merges. > That's quite the opposite of my experience with "kompare" (a KDE-based > merge program). Click-click-click, save, done. > > >> I use perforce at work and it has automatic merge. This takes away a lot >> of pain and I must only suffer if there are merge conflicts. I always diff >> before commiting and always build to make sure it's good. >> > > It's the same in fossil: > > fossil merge <other branch> > > is painless until their are conflicts, at which point a human has to > resolve those. > > >> My alternative approach for merge is: >> >> 1. get head on trunk and copy the files to another directory >> 2. get head on branch and copy the files to another directory >> 3. get head on trunk, perform merge (fossil now records the fact of the >> merge) >> 4. copy files from copied trunk directory >> 5. diff against trunk using meld checking each file one by one. >> > > That's a painful way to do it. Unless you have conflicts, merging should > be painless. It sounds to me like you are using 'fossil gdiff' to resolve > your merges manually instead of using 'fossil merge'? > > >> Is there a way to make merges much less painful? Is there any form of >> automatic resolution in fossil or a tool that has this and works similar to >> perforce in this respect? >> > > It's all automatic - i suspect you're just going about it the hard way. > > -- > ----- stephan beal > http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ > http://gplus.to/sgbeal > "Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of > those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf > > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users > >
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
