Re: [git-users] git merge: error: The following untracked working tree files would be overwritten by merge

[John McKown]

I'm not knowledgeable enough to answer your question. I do wonder why
you are not tracking the files in obsolete/ . If you truly don't want
to track them, then I _think_ that it might be well to add the line:
obsolete/
to  your .gitignore file.

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 4:38 AM, Carsten Fuchs  wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> in my repo, I'm doing this:
>
>> $ git status
>> # On branch master
>> # Your branch is behind 'origin/master' by 2 commits, and can be
>> fast-forwarded.
>> #
>> # Untracked files:
>> #   (use "git add ..." to include in what will be committed)
>> #
>> #   obsolete/
>> nothing added to commit but untracked files present (use "git add" to
>> track)
>>
>> $ git merge origin/master --ff-only
>> Updating f419d57..2da6052
>> error: The following untracked working tree files would be overwritten by
>> merge:
>> obsolete/e107/Readme.txt
>> obsolete/e107/article.php
>> obsolete/e107/backend.php
>> [...]
>
>
> Well, I seem to understand the problem, and the solution seems to be simple
> as well: renaming the obsolete/ directory is enough.
>
> But why does Git find a problem here at all?
>
> Compare with what Subversion did in an analogous case: When I ran "svn
> update" and the update brought new files for which there already was an
> untracked copy in the working directory, Subversion:
> - started to consider the file as tracked,
> - but left the file in the working-copy alone.
>
> As a result, a subsequent "svn status" might
> a) no longer show the file at all, if the foreign copy in the
> working directory happened to be the same as the one brought by the "svn
> update", or
> b) flag the file as modified, if different from the one that "svn
> update" would have created in its place.
>
> So my real question is, why does Git not do something analogous?
> (Afaics, update the HEAD, update the Index, but leave the working-copy
> edition alone?)
>
> I searched for this beforehand, and most advice involves either stashing, or
> with "git reset --hard" the loss of the untracked files.
>
> Best regards,
> Carsten
>
>
>
> --
>Cafu - the open-source Game and Graphics Engine
> for multiplayer, cross-platform, real-time 3D Action
>   Learn more at http://www.cafu.de
>
> --
>
>



-- 
Maranatha! <><
John McKown

-- 

[git-users] git merge: error: The following untracked working tree files would be overwritten by merge

[Carsten Fuchs]

Hi all,

in my repo, I'm doing this:


$ git status
# On branch master
# Your branch is behind 'origin/master' by 2 commits, and can be fast-forwarded.
#
# Untracked files:
#   (use "git add ..." to include in what will be committed)
#
#   obsolete/
nothing added to commit but untracked files present (use "git add" to track)

$ git merge origin/master --ff-only
Updating f419d57..2da6052
error: The following untracked working tree files would be overwritten by merge:
obsolete/e107/Readme.txt
obsolete/e107/article.php
obsolete/e107/backend.php
[...]


Well, I seem to understand the problem, and the solution seems to be simple as well: 
renaming the obsolete/ directory is enough.


But why does Git find a problem here at all?

Compare with what Subversion did in an analogous case: When I ran "svn update" and the 
update brought new files for which there already was an untracked copy in the working 
directory, Subversion:

- started to consider the file as tracked,
- but left the file in the working-copy alone.

As a result, a subsequent "svn status" might
	a) no longer show the file at all, if the foreign copy in the working directory 
happened to be the same as the one brought by the "svn update", or
	b) flag the file as modified, if different from the one that "svn update" would have 
created in its place.


So my real question is, why does Git not do something analogous?
(Afaics, update the HEAD, update the Index, but leave the working-copy edition 
alone?)

I searched for this beforehand, and most advice involves either stashing, or with "git 
reset --hard" the loss of the untracked files.


Best regards,
Carsten



--
   Cafu - the open-source Game and Graphics Engine
for multiplayer, cross-platform, real-time 3D Action
  Learn more at http://www.cafu.de

--