You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@subversion.apache.org by Jan Hendrik <ja...@bigfoot.com> on 2004/04/07 11:35:06 UTC
conflict: strange conflict marking
Hi all out there!
Yesterday I was presented with a conflict during update here in the
office that looked very strange:
<p><a href="autogrph/13392_d.htm">Fürstenberg, Brief (11.6.1673)</a></p>
<p><a href="autogrph/13392_e.htm">Fürstenberg, Letter (6-11-1673)</a></p>
<p><a href="autogrph/10412_d.htm">Erbschein</a></p>
<<<<<<< .mine
=======
<p><a href="autogrph/14593_d.htm">Koch - Kinsky, Katalog der Musikautogra-phen-Samlung >Louis Koch</a></p>
>>>>>>> .r340
<p><a href="autogrph/10412_e.htm">Certificate of Heirship</a></p>
<p><a href="autogrph/14593_d.htm">Koch - Kinsky, Katalog der Musikautogra-phen-Samlung Louis Koch</a></p>
<p><a href="autogrph/14593_e.htm">Koch - Kinsky, Catalogue of the Musical Autograph Collection Louis Koch</a></p>
<p><a href="autogrph/13286_d.htm">Kürschnermeister Carl Siegmund Brix' Hauserwerb zu Lüchow</a></p>
Note that between <<<<.mine and ===== there is no entry.
Unfortunately I missed to save the relevant parts in .mine and .r340
and .base, too. Generally the lines should have looked like this:
<p><a href="autogrph/13392_d.htm">Fürstenberg, Brief (11.6.1673)</a></p>
<p><a href="autogrph/13392_e.htm">Fürstenberg, Letter (6-11-1673)</a></p>
<p><a href="autogrph/10412_d.htm">Erbschein</a></p>
<p><a href="autogrph/14593_d.htm">Koch - Kinsky, Katalog der Musikautographen-Samlung >Louis Koch</a></p>
<p><a href="autogrph/10412_e.htm">Certificate of Heirship</a></p>
<p><a href="autogrph/13286_d.htm">Kürschnermeister Carl Siegmund Brix' Hauserwerb zu Lüchow</a></p>
According to log files and other research there should have been no
conflict at all as no one else here had to edit anything in this part of
the file since days. Updates on the machine generating the conflict
were done frequently.
That machine runs SVN 1.0.1-2, TSVN 1.0.2, W2K SP2.
Of course it was not difficult to get things straight, but I wonder how
the conflict could happen at all.
Jan Hendrik
---------------------------------------
Freedom quote:
The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedom.
-- Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: conflict: strange conflict marking
Posted by Jan Hendrik <ja...@bigfoot.com>.
Concerning Re: conflict: strange conflict mark
kfogel@collab.net wrote on 10 May 2004, 13:35, at least in part:
> I think what's going on is that the principle of 'diff3' is to show a
> comparison between the two different final states, *not* between the
> two different changes. The other person changed two paragraphs, but
> the final state of their region still included that other paragraph
> that you deleted. Since that's what the file looked like for them at
> the time, that's what merge shows.
Not exactly, Karl. Say there are paragraphs 1-5. A deletes #2, B
modifies #4, the other paragraphs are not modified:
paragraph 1
paragraph 2 --> deleted by A
paragraph 3 --> not modified at all
paragraph 4 --> modified & committed by B
paragraph 5
Now that's what the merged file looked like after I updated:
paragraph 1
<<<<<.mine
=====
paragraph 2 (not modified by B, but deleted by A)
paragraph 3 (not modified at all)
paragraph 4 (modified by B)
>>>>>.rxxx
paragraph 5
where I would have expected that SVN sees that one change is
before paragraph 3 (the deletion of #2), and the other change is
after paragraph 3 (the modification of #4), thus no conflict. As said
to Ben it is a pity I first did my work and resolved the conflict and
thought of posting only hours later ...
Jan Hendrik
---------------------------------------
Freedom quote:
A lot of people out there pay good lip service
to the idea of personal freedom ...
right up to the point that someone tries to do something
that they don't personally approve of.
-- Neal Boortz
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: conflict: strange conflict marking
Posted by kf...@collab.net.
"Jan Hendrik" <ja...@bigfoot.com> writes:
> Well, I had this strange conflict markers today again:
>
> Had deleted a paragraph in my working copy. Someone else did a
> change two paragraphs further and committed. On update I got the
> conflict with the <<<<.mine/==== being empty, and the
> ====/>>>>.rxxx part containing three paragraphs: the one I had
> deleted, the next unchanged paragraph, and finally the third
> changed on the repository.
>
> Should think that SVN is intelligent enough to understand that one
> change happened *before* a given paragraph and the other *after*.
> Also note that in the original case posted there was no delete nor
> any other modification. So there should not have been any conflict
> at all. Any clue?
I think what's going on is that the principle of 'diff3' is to show a
comparison between the two different final states, *not* between the
two different changes. The other person changed two paragraphs, but
the final state of their region still included that other paragraph
that you deleted. Since that's what the file looked like for them at
the time, that's what merge shows.
-Karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: conflict: strange conflict marking
Posted by Jan Hendrik <ja...@bigfoot.com>.
Concerning Re: conflict: strange conflict mark
Ben Collins-Sussman wrote on 10 May 2004, 12:11, at least in part:
> Can you attach the 3 fulltext files to an email, and then also show us
> the merged result with conflict markers? Be sure to cc: sander striker,
> because it's his libsvn_diff library which is doing the 3-way merge and
> producing conflict markers. Maybe he can comment on the result.
Argh! They are gone, again. First resolved the conflicts and only
after work I thought of posting while scanning through the day's list
mail and happening to notice my previous posting on conflict
markers. As a matter of fact I have widely resigned posting
troubles and annoyances, just try to get along and avoid the
situation in future (e.g. if something causes trouble like eol-style
property when switching between trunk/branch, well, then it is not
used anymore). That surely is nothing but helpful for you, however,
I simply had to set priorities. Pondering about things that are not
essential part of one's work is really unhealthy when time is short
anyway. However, I'll try to think of first zipping up all conflict files
first next time I see such a strange conflict marker.
Jan Hendrik
---------------------------------------
Freedom quote:
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
-- Thomas Jefferson
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: conflict: strange conflict marking
Posted by Ben Collins-Sussman <su...@collab.net>.
On Mon, 2004-05-10 at 12:10, Jan Hendrik wrote:
> Well, I had this strange conflict markers today again:
>
> Had deleted a paragraph in my working copy. Someone else did a
> change two paragraphs further and committed. On update I got the
> conflict with the <<<<.mine/==== being empty, and the
> ====/>>>>.rxxx part containing three paragraphs: the one I had
> deleted, the next unchanged paragraph, and finally the third
> changed on the repository.
>
> Should think that SVN is intelligent enough to understand that one
> change happened *before* a given paragraph and the other *after*.
> Also note that in the original case posted there was no delete nor
> any other modification. So there should not have been any conflict
Can you attach the 3 fulltext files to an email, and then also show us
the merged result with conflict markers? Be sure to cc: sander striker,
because it's his libsvn_diff library which is doing the 3-way merge and
producing conflict markers. Maybe he can comment on the result.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
conflict: strange conflict marking
Posted by Jan Hendrik <ja...@bigfoot.com>.
Well, I had this strange conflict markers today again:
Had deleted a paragraph in my working copy. Someone else did a
change two paragraphs further and committed. On update I got the
conflict with the <<<<.mine/==== being empty, and the
====/>>>>.rxxx part containing three paragraphs: the one I had
deleted, the next unchanged paragraph, and finally the third
changed on the repository.
Should think that SVN is intelligent enough to understand that one
change happened *before* a given paragraph and the other *after*.
Also note that in the original case posted there was no delete nor
any other modification. So there should not have been any conflict
at all. Any clue?
Jan Hendrik
---------------------------------------
Freedom quote:
Let us build cathedrals of peace,
where the people are free.
-- Ronald Reagan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org