Problems with merge --preview
Dirkjan Ochtman
dirkjan at ochtman.nl
Sat Aug 29 09:44:29 UTC 2009
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 21:36, Greg Ward<greg at gerg.ca> wrote:
> From the glog output above, 136 is clearly already an ancestor of the
> current head (141). But merge --preview claims it's going to be
> merged. And if I look at the patch in 136 (diff -c136), I can see
> that it has already been incorporated into the code at 141.
>
> This smells wrong to me. Am I missing something, or is merge --preview broken?
Sorry to say, but merge -P is wrong. I had noticed the broken
behavior, but haven't made the time to figure out why it's going wrong
(it looks like a sort of off-by-one error, though). I'm the guy who
put merge --preview in there, so I should probably look into fixing it
sooner. If you want to help out, please do!
Cheers,
Dirkjan
More information about the Mercurial
mailing list