From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] Add flag to make unpack_trees() not print errors. Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 01:16:34 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Daniel Barkalow X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Feb 05 02:19:05 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 1JMCSi-0001Kp-3d for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 05 Feb 2008 02:19:00 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759348AbYBEBRT (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2008 20:17:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932077AbYBEBRT (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2008 20:17:19 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:44430 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1759348AbYBEBRR (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2008 20:17:17 -0500 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 05 Feb 2008 01:17:14 -0000 Received: from host86-138-198-40.range86-138.btcentralplus.com (EHLO racer.home) [86.138.198.40] by mail.gmx.net (mp052) with SMTP; 05 Feb 2008 02:17:14 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1870r0OQR873tLSuos2PjA21x6RttzzgCsTbTWhi6 SuS41ZZa3Uusuj X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (LSU 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > This will allow builtin-checkout to suppress merge errors if it's going > to try more merging methods. I saw one error() in twoway_merge(), one in bind_merge(), and one in onway_merge() that were not guarded by o->gently. Also, I'd call it "silent", not "gently". > Additionally, if unpack_trees() returns with an error, but without > printing anything, it will roll back any changes to the index (by > rereading the index, currently). This obviously could be done by the > caller, but chances are that the caller would forget and debugging this > is difficult. Granted, it is easy to forget. But maybe the caller does not need the index? Or maybe it wants a different one? I'd prefer the caller to clean up, if necessary. Ciao, Dscho