linux-kernel - Re: git merge conflict resolution?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 25 Sep 2009 11:58:31 +0200
From:	Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@....de>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	git@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Russell King <rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: git merge conflict resolution?

On 2009.09.24 18:18:30 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> Question about how git does merge conflict resolution.
> 
> This patch doesn't really apply, and the results after the
> patch aren't what at least I expect.
[...]
> Russell's patch removes the "(moderated for non-subscribers)"
> from each entry, yet the final result includes it.
> 
> Can someone help me understand why?

If you look at baea7b946f00a291b166ccae7fcfed6c01530cc6, you see:

    Merge branch 'origin' into for-linus

    Conflicts:
        MAINTAINERS

Git was unable to automatically merge that file, as there were
conflicting changes. That merge was done by Russel King, and _he_
decided that the result should include the "(moderated for ...)" part.

Björn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/