From: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
To: Fredrik Kuivinen <freku045@student.liu.se>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, junkio@cox.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] A new merge algorithm, take 3
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 17:27:16 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0509081723360.23242@iabervon.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050908200559.GA26088@c165.ib.student.liu.se>
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Fredrik Kuivinen wrote:
> The first one agrees with what was actually committed. For the second
> one the difference between the tree produced by the algorithm and what
> was committed is:
>
> diff --git a/include/net/ieee80211.h b/include/net/ieee80211.h
> --- a/include/net/ieee80211.h
> +++ b/include/net/ieee80211.h
> @@ -425,9 +425,7 @@ struct ieee80211_stats {
>
> struct ieee80211_device;
>
> -#if 0 /* for later */
> #include "ieee80211_crypt.h"
> -#endif
>
> #define SEC_KEY_1 (1<<0)
> #define SEC_KEY_2 (1<<1)
>
>
> I have looked at the files and common ancestors involved and I think
> that this change have been introduced manually. I may have missed
> something when I analysed it though...
Certainly possible that it was done manually.
> > > The merge cases reported by Tony Luck and Len Brown are both cleanly
> > > merged by my code.
> >
> > Do they come out correctly? Both of those have cases which cannot be
> > decided correctly with only the ancestor trees, due to one branch
> > reverting a patch that was only in one ancestor. The correct result is to
> > revert that patch, but figuring out that requires looking at more trees. I
> > think your algorithm should work for this case, but it would be good to
> > have verification. (IIRC, Len got the correct result while Tony got the
> > wrong result and then corrected it later.)
>
> Len's merge case come out identically to the tree he committed. I have
> described what I got for Tony's case in
> <20050826184731.GA13629@c165.ib.student.liu.se> (my merge algorithm
> produces the result Tony expected to get, but he didn't get that from
> git-resolve-script).
Good. It looks to me like this is a good algorithm in practice, then.
-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-09-08 21:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-09-07 16:47 [PATCH 0/2] A new merge algorithm, take 3 Fredrik Kuivinen
2005-09-07 16:50 ` [PATCH 1/2] Add '-i' flag to read-tree to make it ignore whats in the working directory Fredrik Kuivinen
2005-09-11 2:54 ` Unified merge driver pushed out to "master" branch Junio C Hamano
2005-09-11 21:05 ` Fredrik Kuivinen
2005-09-12 1:23 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-09-14 5:56 ` Another merge test case from the kernel tree Junio C Hamano
2005-09-14 16:11 ` Daniel Barkalow
2005-09-14 16:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-09-14 17:42 ` Fredrik Kuivinen
2005-09-14 17:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-09-15 0:47 ` Yet another set of merge test cases " Junio C Hamano
2005-09-19 16:13 ` Fredrik Kuivinen
2005-09-20 1:53 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-09-20 5:50 ` Fredrik Kuivinen
2005-09-07 16:51 ` [PATCH 2/2] A new merge algorithm Fredrik Kuivinen
2005-09-07 18:33 ` [PATCH 0/2] A new merge algorithm, take 3 Daniel Barkalow
2005-09-08 6:06 ` Fredrik Kuivinen
2005-09-08 15:27 ` Daniel Barkalow
2005-09-08 20:05 ` Fredrik Kuivinen
2005-09-08 21:27 ` Daniel Barkalow [this message]
2005-09-07 18:36 ` Junio C Hamano
[not found] ` <431F34FF.5050301@citi.umich.edu>
[not found] ` <7vvf1cz64l.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
2005-09-08 15:06 ` Chuck Lever
2005-09-08 16:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-09-08 17:19 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-09-08 17:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-09-08 18:16 ` Chuck Lever
2005-09-08 18:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-09-08 18:58 ` Chuck Lever
2005-09-08 20:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-09-09 7:44 ` [RFH] Merge driver Junio C Hamano
2005-09-09 16:05 ` Daniel Barkalow
2005-09-09 16:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-09-09 17:25 ` Daniel Barkalow
2005-09-11 4:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-09-12 21:08 ` Fredrik Kuivinen
2005-09-12 21:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-09-13 20:33 ` Fredrik Kuivinen
2005-09-13 20:46 ` Junio C Hamano
2005-09-08 20:54 ` [PATCH 0/2] A new merge algorithm, take 3 Junio C Hamano
2005-09-08 21:23 ` A Large Angry SCM
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.63.0509081723360.23242@iabervon.org \
--to=barkalow@iabervon.org \
--cc=freku045@student.liu.se \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=junkio@cox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).