How to use Mercurial?

Sune Foldager cryo at cyanite.org
Sat Apr 10 07:47:06 CDT 2010


On 10-04-2010 13:36, Douglas Philips wrote:
> On 2010 Apr 10, at 6:32 AM, Sune Foldager wrote:
>> On 10-04-2010 00:27, Yawar Amin wrote:
>>> On 4/9/10 4:44 PM, Harry Putnam said:
>>>> Thanks, glad you posted... I was thinking it might mean extraneous non
>>>> tracked files or the like... but I guess those would not be of
>>>> consequence here.
>>> Untracked files in the working directory also make it `dirty' ...
>>> just think of
>>> an untracked file as one big change that hasn't been checked in yet.
>>
>> Well, not with respect to merging. A dirty working directory is one
>> which would allow you to commit some file changes. Untracked files don't
>> do that. Only already-tracked files that are modified, already-tracked
>> files that are removed (or renamed) or new files that are created (or
>> copied) make the dirstate dirty in this respect.
>>
>> In other words, only if "hg status -mar" shows anything.
> 
> Uhm, isn't that true only if the files are untracked
> in any of the changesets to be merged? If the untracked
> files are not tracked in the working directories parents,
> but are tracked in another changeset, what would the merge
> implication be, esp. if the contents of the files in
> the working directory differ from the contents being
> tracked in the other changeset?

Yes, this is correct; I forgot to consider that case, thanks! In case
you have an untracked file, foo, and bring in a versioned file also
called foo, Mercurial fails the update with an informative message. I
think it's fine if the files are identical, though.

/Sune


More information about the Mercurial mailing list