From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rene Herman Subject: Re: git pull versus fetch/merge Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 12:58:10 +0200 Message-ID: <48846BC2.4090407@keyaccess.nl> References: <488452D6.1060508@keyaccess.nl> <20080721102320.GA19776@atjola.homenet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Takashi Iwai To: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Bj=F6rn_Steinbrink?= X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jul 21 12:57:08 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KKt4d-0000N9-Hq for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 12:56:59 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758276AbYGUKz7 convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jul 2008 06:55:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757814AbYGUKz7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jul 2008 06:55:59 -0400 Received: from smtpq2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl ([213.51.146.201]:43264 "EHLO smtpq2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757553AbYGUKz6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jul 2008 06:55:58 -0400 Received: from [213.51.146.190] (port=53809 helo=smtp1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl) by smtpq2.tilbu1.nb.home.nl with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KKt3c-00019j-Tg; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 12:55:56 +0200 Received: from cc334381-b.groni1.gr.home.nl ([82.73.12.33]:47943 helo=[192.168.0.3]) by smtp1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KKt3c-0000sf-5F; Mon, 21 Jul 2008 12:55:56 +0200 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080421) In-Reply-To: <20080721102320.GA19776@atjola.homenet> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 21-07-08 12:23, Bj=F6rn Steinbrink wrote: > Your fetch/merge approach was different from what your pull approach=20 > did. tiwai/devel did not get updated by the fetch, which means that > you tried to merge the old state of that branch and that caused some=20 > conflicts. OTOH the pull did fetch the latest state from the remote > repo and merged that cleanly. >=20 > Your fetch/merge approach was more like "git pull" without any=20 > arguments, but with the current branch setup to track tiwai/devel. In > that case, pull really does a "git fetch tiwai", and it should fail > in the same way. Thank you. Also due to a reply on the ALSA list by Mark brown I now get= =20 this. Yes, the remote was rebased while I had it setup as a remote here= =20 it seems; only recently have it under this name, so I didn't think that= =20 was the case. After a "git remote rm tiwai, git remote add tiwai "= =20 things work fine again as it fetched a completely new branch. Hurray for rebasing public trees. This specific branch should be rebase= d=20 only at every kernel release so I guess it's okay. I guess I can just d= o the git pull always, or the fetch every time and let the reject warn me= =20 that it was rebased after which I'll do the remote rm/add thing again. Many thanks for the concrete description of what goes on. Made it obvio= us. Rene.