From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Strange response after merge from upstream Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 07:26:06 +0100 Message-ID: <87y6ll51tt.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <833a3umrfx.fsf@gnu.org> <83skbuko4g.fsf@gnu.org> <87bpii55z0.fsf@telefonica.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1259751098 10037 80.91.229.12 (2 Dec 2009 10:51:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 10:51:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar?= Fuentes , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 02 11:51:31 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NFmnx-0005yG-NM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 11:51:29 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38901 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NFmnx-0005Vi-EV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 05:51:29 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NFifN-0005sc-DO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 01:26:21 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NFifI-0005rk-CO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 01:26:20 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=42282 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NFifI-0005rh-1Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 01:26:16 -0500 Original-Received: from impaqm5.telefonica.net ([213.4.138.5]:52414) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NFifH-00071F-3M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 01:26:15 -0500 Original-Received: from IMPmailhost4.adm.correo ([10.20.102.125]) by IMPaqm5.telefonica.net with bizsmtp id C4lX1d01M2iL0W23R6SECr; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 07:26:14 +0100 Original-Received: from qcore ([83.38.73.112]) by IMPmailhost4.adm.correo with BIZ IMP id C6SB1d0042RMVUr1k6SC68; Wed, 02 Dec 2009 07:26:14 +0100 X-TE-authinfo: authemail="981711563$telefonica.net" |auth_email="981711563@telefonica.net" X-TE-AcuTerraCos: auth_cuTerraCos="cosuitnetc01" In-Reply-To: (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 02 Dec 2009 00:58:35 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 05:50:08 -0500 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:118130 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> merge -pull does this: >>=20 >> if branches-diverged? >> yes: merge (you need to explicitly commit afterwards) >> no : pull (no need to commit) >>=20 >> > would it avoid the "1 extra revision" in the output of "missing"? >>=20 >> Yes, because your quickfixes/ branch did not diverged from the branch >> you pulled from, so it will do a `pull', like you did on your trunk >> branch. > > Thanks, but it doesn't seem to work here: after "bzr pull" in trunk/ > and "bzr merge --pull" in quickfixes/, "bzr missing" still says that I > "have 1 extra revision(s)" and cites the commit from yesterday. That > could be understandable, but it also says I'm "missing 27 revision(s)" > and seems to show the changes just merged from the trunk. > > Does this happen because of yesterday's "commit" after "merge"? Yes, for the 1 extra revision. I don't know from where come the missing 27 revisions if you already merged those. You can see the stuff you merged on the last commit on quickfixes/ with bzr log -n1 -l30 (show one level of merge history, 30 commits maximum) See if the revisions listed there are the same `bzr missing' lists. > Do I understand correctly that, to get rid of this, I need to "merge > --pull" all the way, and even a single "merge; commit" will force the > branches to diverge no matter what? Yes. > Is there a way of ``resyncing'' the branch with the trunk, so that > "bzr missing" shows no missing/extra revisions? Omitting the "27 missing revisions" and going back to the scenario you described on your original post, a solution for this is to push that extra revision into trunk. It is not the right solution, though, if your `trunk' branch is intended to be a mirror of upstream's `trunk'. Other solution is to uncommit, if you didn't commited more stuff to quickfixes/ : bzr uncommit bzr revert A brute-force solution is to delete the quickfixes/ branch (`rm -rf quickfixes/' will do fine) and create another with the same name. This is acceptable as far as you have no useful local commits there, of course. > Or did I do something wrong? It depends. Sometimes the right thing is to pull, sometimes you want to merge. For your local mirror of upstream's trunk, you always want to pull. For the rest of the branches, if you already have local commits, `merge' is your only option. Once you send the local commits upstream, you can pull again. --=20 =C3=93scar