Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 13:55:20 -0700 From: [email protected] (Matt Birkholz)
I probably should have REMOVED it. master is our HEAD, no? If more people pull origin HEAD into their local HEAD, I am going to shoot it... you know where. :-} After running `git pull' three times -- the first time being shown an error similar to the last one I reported about `error: Ref refs/origin/remote/master is at ... but expected ...', the second time being shown some fifteen hundred changes, and the third time being shown `Already up-to-date.' --, git appears to be happier about my clean repository, and no longer alternates between different output when I run `git pull' subsequently. But earlier you suggested running `git pull origin master' and said something about keeping my HEAD (which, I must say, has not been easy in my interactions with git!) or specifying master. What is the difference between `git pull' and `git pull origin master', and what is all this about HEADs and masters and origin HEADs and local HEADs and shooting things? So far, the process I have used for making changes to the Git repository has been `git pull; git add <pathname> ...; git commit -a; git push'. Is there anything wrong with this? Am I supposed to be aware of some sort of branching going on or something? Also, in my unclean repository, I just tried running `git pull' again, and it complained about precisely the same files. I ran `git checkout -- <those files>', and `git pull' complains about the same problems: % git pull Updating 944e600..f2b42a4 error: Entry 'src/microcode/bkpt.h' not uptodate. Cannot merge. `git status' lists the same files, too. So `git checkout' seems to have done nothing. _______________________________________________ MIT-Scheme-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/mit-scheme-devel
