GuilhemBichot wrote:
> Sorry, it was wrong usage from my part, I tried a wrong branch!
> Now I got your branch, and I see .BASE files with --weave.
> However, I have 33 files with text conflicts (according to "bzr conflicts --text"), but for two of them there is no BASE file.
> Here is the single conflict region of one such file without a BASE file:
> <<<<<<< TREE
> --echo 'Bug: value in information schema does not match'
> =======
>>>>>>>> MERGE-SOURCE
> and for the other file:
> <<<<<<< TREE
> 'Bug: value in information schema does not match'
> =======
>>>>>>>> MERGE-SOURCE
> Let me know if you'd like instructions to download those branches.
>
I'd be willing to take a look at them at least. It *looks* like this
would be a content conflict, where one side had deleted a file and the
other had introduced content.
But maybe not.
There is code in place that if one text 'dominates', then we don't build
the weave, but if one dominates, I don't think you can get conflicts.
The new code is doing:
if base_lines is not None:
# Conflict self._raw_conflicts.append(('text conflict', trans_id))
name = self.tt.final_name(trans_id) parent_id = self.tt.final_parent(trans_id) file_group = self._dump_conflicts(name, parent_id, file_id, no_base=False, base_lines=base_lines) file_group.append(trans_id)
So *it* cannot generate a 'text conflict' and not generate a .BASE, but
it is possible that there is a different code path generating the text
conflict that I didn't see.
(And the case where you have a deleted file seemed likely to trigger that.)
Probably it would be easiest to try to debug this with whatever branches
you are using.
John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
GuilhemBichot wrote:
> Sorry, it was wrong usage from my part, I tried a wrong branch!
> Now I got your branch, and I see .BASE files with --weave.
> However, I have 33 files with text conflicts (according to "bzr conflicts --text"), but for two of them there is no BASE file.
> Here is the single conflict region of one such file without a BASE file:
> <<<<<<< TREE
> --echo 'Bug: value in information schema does not match'
> =======
>>>>>>>> MERGE-SOURCE
> and for the other file:
> <<<<<<< TREE
> 'Bug: value in information schema does not match'
> =======
>>>>>>>> MERGE-SOURCE
> Let me know if you'd like instructions to download those branches.
>
I'd be willing to take a look at them at least. It *looks* like this
would be a content conflict, where one side had deleted a file and the
other had introduced content.
But maybe not.
There is code in place that if one text 'dominates', then we don't build
the weave, but if one dominates, I don't think you can get conflicts.
The new code is doing:
self. _raw_conflicts. append( ('text conflict', trans_id)) final_name( trans_id)
parent_ id = self.tt. final_parent( trans_id)
file_ group = self._dump_ conflicts( name, parent_id, file_id,
no_ base=False,
base_ lines=base_ lines)
file_ group.append( trans_id)
if base_lines is not None:
# Conflict
name = self.tt.
So *it* cannot generate a 'text conflict' and not generate a .BASE, but
it is possible that there is a different code path generating the text
conflict that I didn't see.
(And the case where you have a deleted file seemed likely to trigger that.)
Probably it would be easiest to try to debug this with whatever branches
you are using.
John enigmail. mozdev. org/
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://
iEYEARECAAYFAks dYjoACgkQJdeBCY SNAAPEhwCfYKYD9 /EVATXXUVf6ZA+ hE+jo +ZbHBeDFlZiMysH Z7
XRUAoMDydPxusUW
=dibv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----