From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.176.0/21 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] t6024: fix timing problem Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 15:23:16 -0800 Message-ID: <7vvekgog0r.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <20061207101707.GA19139@spearce.org> <7vmz5w5tuw.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:38:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org X-Greylist: delayed 898 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 18:38:15 EST In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:49:34 +0100 (CET)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by dough.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1GuHCj-0006aa-VH for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 13 Dec 2006 00:38:34 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932562AbWLLXiQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Dec 2006 18:38:16 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932566AbWLLXiQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Dec 2006 18:38:16 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtai01.cox.net ([68.230.241.58]:56213 "EHLO fed1rmmtai01.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932562AbWLLXiP (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Dec 2006 18:38:15 -0500 Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao10.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.03 201-2131-130-104-20060516) with ESMTP id <20061212232317.NSYL20715.fed1rmmtao10.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net>; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 18:23:17 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id xzPU1V00F1kojtg0000000; Tue, 12 Dec 2006 18:23:28 -0500 To: Johannes Schindelin Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: > This script tests a complicated merge, where _all_ files conflict. In > these circumstances, the ordering of the commits -- which is affected > not by the timestamps in the commit message -- becomes a deciding factor > of the merge result. "not by the timestamps", or "by the timestamps"? I am confused... Do you mean the commit timestamps affect which merge base commit becomes ours and theirs during the computation of the virtual merge base commit? That certainly explains the problem. > How about this: if there is an add/add conflict, we treat it as > if there _was_ an empty file, and we let the shiny new xdl_merge() > find the _true_ conflicts, _instead of_ removing the file from > the index, adding both files with different "~blabla" markers > appended to their file names to the working directory. I was not thinking about this t6024 test failure problem but was wondering about doing exactly that in merge-recursive to match the "two file merge" magic we have in git-merge-one-file.sh --- I guess great minds do think alike ;-).