Re: Small rerere in rebase regression

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org> writes:

> I'm not sure whether the new behavior is a defect in rerere.c or a
> consequence of the extra rerere call in interactive rebase...

Interesting.  When running an unnecessary "git rerere" (because it
already was run and recorded the preimage), we used to be silent.
With the updated code, we say something.

At least it seems that we do not record the same preimage as a
different variant, so the regression is hopefully merely cosmetic.

I do not think it is a crime to say "git rerere" repeatedly without
changing anything, so I do not think "rebase -i"'s call to rerere
in die_with_patch is wrong, even though some calls to it seem to be
made after seeing a "git merge" fail (which means we know 'rerere'
has been run already).

I think all plumbing that can turn an index into unmerged state has
a call to git_rerere() at the end (the only obvious exception being
"update-index" that lets you stuff higher stage entries to the
index), so as long as "rebase -i" uses them correctly, I suspect
that die_with_patch shouldn't have to have a call to "git rerere".