From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: git merge vs git commit Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 10:34:42 -0700 Message-ID: <7vhc8p6x59.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20080909165236.GA8850@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Russell King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Sep 09 19:36:03 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 1Kd78E-0007dR-23 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 09 Sep 2008 19:36:02 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753570AbYIIRez (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2008 13:34:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753427AbYIIRez (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2008 13:34:55 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:36971 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753393AbYIIRez (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2008 13:34:55 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68D81799D5; Tue, 9 Sep 2008 13:34:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-211.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4B620799CD; Tue, 9 Sep 2008 13:34:46 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20080909165236.GA8850@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> (Russell King's message of "Tue, 9 Sep 2008 17:52:37 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 9D3468F0-7E95-11DD-8BDF-3113EBD4C077-77302942!a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Russell King writes: > If there aren't any conflicts, you get a nice clean merge, resulting in: > ... > However, if you have a conflict that needs resolving, you fix it up as > ... > instead - an additional reference from commit 'K' back to commit 'A' > which isn't present in the clean merge case. > > Is this intentional, or is it a bug? I think some changes went into 1.6.0 around this area to (r)eject parents that are redundant. What happens when you use more recent git with the same example?