On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Tony Papadimitriou <[email protected]> wrote:
> <<<<<<< BEGIN MERGE CONFLICT: local copy shown first <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > @?status RF_OUT,#?MsgOn,#?MsgOff,fWriteZ > ======= COMMON ANCESTOR content follows ============================ > @?status *SRF_OUT*,#?MsgOn,#?MsgOff,fWriteZ > ======= MERGED IN content follows ================================== > @?status SRF_OUT,#?MsgOn,#?MsgOff,puts > >>>>>>> END MERGE CONFLICT >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > As you can see, the common ancestor content shows the SRF_OUT label when > that label was named so only in the (under development) branch version. > > Additional info that may help determine what went wrong: > The SRF_OUT is renamed in the first node of the new branch several > check-ins before the cherry picked one. > There have been two merged from the trunk (after the rename) but are > unrelated to this change and there were never any merge conflicts. > are you sure they were unrelated: you didn't mention the "puts" vs "fWriteZ" change in your description. Could it that that is the source of the conflict? -- ----- 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 [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
