Hi Junio,
On 2015-06-18 18:00, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin writes:
>
+ git diff seq-onto &&
>>>
>>> I am puzzled with this "diff"; what is this about? Is it a remnant
>>> from an earlier debugging session, or is it making sure seq-onto is
>>> a valid tree-ish?
>>
>> The id
Johannes Schindelin writes:
>>> + git diff seq-onto &&
>>
>> I am puzzled with this "diff"; what is this about? Is it a remnant
>> from an earlier debugging session, or is it making sure seq-onto is
>> a valid tree-ish?
>
> The idea is to verify that we end up with the same tree even if we
>
Hi Junio,
On 2015-06-17 19:33, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin writes:
>
>> +test_expect_failure 'rebase --continue removes CHERRY_PICK_HEAD' '
>> +git checkout -b commit-to-skip &&
>> +for double in X 3 1
>> +do
>> +seq 5 | sed "s/$double/&&/" >seq &&
>> +
Johannes Schindelin writes:
> +test_expect_failure 'rebase --continue removes CHERRY_PICK_HEAD' '
> + git checkout -b commit-to-skip &&
> + for double in X 3 1
> + do
> + seq 5 | sed "s/$double/&&/" >seq &&
> + git add seq &&
> + test_tick &&
> +
When rev-list's --cherry option does not detect that a patch has already
been applied upstream, an interactive rebase would offer to reapply it and
consequently stop at that patch with a failure, mentioning that the diff
is empty.
Traditionally, a `git rebase --continue` simply skips the commit in
5 matches
Mail list logo
