Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: <<< conflict markers

[Aaron Bentley]

Tom Lord wrote:

>     > From: Aaron Bentley <address@hidden>
>
>     > Update is a three-way merge.
>
> It's a merge with three trees, but not quite a 3-way merge.
>
> E.g., it doesn't, strictly speaking, need to build the common ancestor
> to achieve it's effect.   
>
> It's basically just "redo my tree-local changes against a revision
> that happens to have a common ancestor with my tree".

But you need to build the common ancestor to determine what "my 
tree-local changes" are.  Yes, update's less powerful than star-merge, 
but for the default version, the only difference between star-merge and 
update is which way the conflicts point.

Star-merge:
apply the difference between patch-2 and patch-3 to tree.

Update:
apply the difference between patch-2 and tree to patch-3.

They're both three-way merges, but star-merge handles more cases.  Or 
are you drawing a distinction that the three trees don't all exist at 
the same time with update?

> (But, again, an update-like (i.e., using those same 3 trees) 3-way
> merge could be handy.)

Personally, I find star-merge makes a fine update, so I'm not sure what 
it'd be handy for.

Aaron