mirrors/git
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/git/git.git synced 2024-11-01 06:47:52 +01:00
Code Activity
git/Documentation/git-merge-file.txt

95 lines
2.8 KiB
Text
Raw Normal View History

Document git-merge-file Most of this is derived from the documentation of RCS merge. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-16 12:22:18 +01:00
git-merge-file(1)
Fix mis-mark-up in git-merge-file.txt documentation Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-17 09:46:35 +01:00
=================
Document git-merge-file Most of this is derived from the documentation of RCS merge. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-16 12:22:18 +01:00
NAME
----
Documentation: sync git.txt command list and manual page title Also reorders a handful entries to make each list sorted alphabetically. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2007-01-19 00:53:37 +01:00
git-merge-file - Run a three-way file merge
Document git-merge-file Most of this is derived from the documentation of RCS merge. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-16 12:22:18 +01:00
SYNOPSIS
--------
[verse]
Documentation: be consistent about "git-" versus "git " Since the git-* commands are not installed in $(bindir), using "git-command <parameters>" in examples in the documentation is not a good idea. On the other hand, it is nice to be able to refer to each command using one hyphenated word. (There is no escaping it, anyway: man page names cannot have spaces in them.) This patch retains the dash in naming an operation, command, program, process, or action. Complete command lines that can be entered at a shell (i.e., without options omitted) are made to use the dashless form. The changes consist only of replacing some spaces with hyphens and vice versa. After a "s/ /-/g", the unpatched and patched versions are identical. Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@uchicago.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-06-30 08:09:04 +02:00
'git merge-file' [-L <current-name> [-L <base-name> [-L <other-name>]]]
merge-file: add option to select union merge favor Signed-off-by: Bert Wesarg <bert.wesarg@googlemail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-03-01 22:46:28 +01:00
[--ours|--theirs|--union] [-p|--stdout] [-q|--quiet] [--marker-size=<n>]
Documentation/git-merge-file: document option "--diff3" The option "--diff3" was added to "git merge-file" in e0af48e (xdiff-merge: optionally show conflicts in "diff3 -m" style) but it was never documented in "Documentation/git-merge-file.txt". Add documentation for this option. Signed-off-by: Ralf Thielow <ralf.thielow@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-08-09 20:09:32 +02:00
[--[no-]diff3] <current-file> <base-file> <other-file>
Document git-merge-file Most of this is derived from the documentation of RCS merge. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-16 12:22:18 +01:00
DESCRIPTION
-----------
Documentation: spell 'git cmd' without dash throughout The documentation was quite inconsistent when spelling 'git cmd' if it only refers to the program, not to some specific invocation syntax: both 'git-cmd' and 'git cmd' spellings exist. The current trend goes towards dashless forms, and there is precedent in 647ac70 (git-svn.txt: stop using dash-form of commands., 2009-07-07) to actively eliminate the dashed variants. Replace 'git-cmd' with 'git cmd' throughout, except where git-shell, git-cvsserver, git-upload-pack, git-receive-pack, and git-upload-archive are concerned, because those really live in the $PATH.
2010-01-10 00:33:00 +01:00
'git merge-file' incorporates all changes that lead from the `<base-file>`
Document git-merge-file Most of this is derived from the documentation of RCS merge. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-16 12:22:18 +01:00
to `<other-file>` into `<current-file>`. The result ordinarily goes into
Documentation: spell 'git cmd' without dash throughout The documentation was quite inconsistent when spelling 'git cmd' if it only refers to the program, not to some specific invocation syntax: both 'git-cmd' and 'git cmd' spellings exist. The current trend goes towards dashless forms, and there is precedent in 647ac70 (git-svn.txt: stop using dash-form of commands., 2009-07-07) to actively eliminate the dashed variants. Replace 'git-cmd' with 'git cmd' throughout, except where git-shell, git-cvsserver, git-upload-pack, git-receive-pack, and git-upload-archive are concerned, because those really live in the $PATH.
2010-01-10 00:33:00 +01:00
`<current-file>`. 'git merge-file' is useful for combining separate changes
Document git-merge-file Most of this is derived from the documentation of RCS merge. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-16 12:22:18 +01:00
to an original. Suppose `<base-file>` is the original, and both
Improve language in git-merge.txt and related docs Improve some minor language and format issues like hyphenation, phrases, spacing, word order, comma, attributes. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-12-09 07:23:51 +01:00
`<current-file>` and `<other-file>` are modifications of `<base-file>`,
Documentation: spell 'git cmd' without dash throughout The documentation was quite inconsistent when spelling 'git cmd' if it only refers to the program, not to some specific invocation syntax: both 'git-cmd' and 'git cmd' spellings exist. The current trend goes towards dashless forms, and there is precedent in 647ac70 (git-svn.txt: stop using dash-form of commands., 2009-07-07) to actively eliminate the dashed variants. Replace 'git-cmd' with 'git cmd' throughout, except where git-shell, git-cvsserver, git-upload-pack, git-receive-pack, and git-upload-archive are concerned, because those really live in the $PATH.
2010-01-10 00:33:00 +01:00
then 'git merge-file' combines both changes.
Document git-merge-file Most of this is derived from the documentation of RCS merge. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-16 12:22:18 +01:00
A conflict occurs if both `<current-file>` and `<other-file>` have changes
Documentation: spell 'git cmd' without dash throughout The documentation was quite inconsistent when spelling 'git cmd' if it only refers to the program, not to some specific invocation syntax: both 'git-cmd' and 'git cmd' spellings exist. The current trend goes towards dashless forms, and there is precedent in 647ac70 (git-svn.txt: stop using dash-form of commands., 2009-07-07) to actively eliminate the dashed variants. Replace 'git-cmd' with 'git cmd' throughout, except where git-shell, git-cvsserver, git-upload-pack, git-receive-pack, and git-upload-archive are concerned, because those really live in the $PATH.
2010-01-10 00:33:00 +01:00
in a common segment of lines. If a conflict is found, 'git merge-file'
Improve language in git-merge.txt and related docs Improve some minor language and format issues like hyphenation, phrases, spacing, word order, comma, attributes. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-12-09 07:23:51 +01:00
normally outputs a warning and brackets the conflict with lines containing
<<<<<<< and >>>>>>> markers. A typical conflict will look like this:
Document git-merge-file Most of this is derived from the documentation of RCS merge. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-16 12:22:18 +01:00
<<<<<<< A
lines in file A
=======
lines in file B
>>>>>>> B
If there are conflicts, the user should edit the result and delete one of
merge-file: add option to select union merge favor Signed-off-by: Bert Wesarg <bert.wesarg@googlemail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-03-01 22:46:28 +01:00
the alternatives. When `--ours`, `--theirs`, or `--union` option is in effect,
however, these conflicts are resolved favouring lines from `<current-file>`,
lines from `<other-file>`, or lines from both respectively. The length of the
conflict markers can be given with the `--marker-size` option.
Document git-merge-file Most of this is derived from the documentation of RCS merge. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-16 12:22:18 +01:00
The exit value of this program is negative on error, and the number of
conflicts otherwise. If the merge was clean, the exit value is 0.
Documentation: spell 'git cmd' without dash throughout The documentation was quite inconsistent when spelling 'git cmd' if it only refers to the program, not to some specific invocation syntax: both 'git-cmd' and 'git cmd' spellings exist. The current trend goes towards dashless forms, and there is precedent in 647ac70 (git-svn.txt: stop using dash-form of commands., 2009-07-07) to actively eliminate the dashed variants. Replace 'git-cmd' with 'git cmd' throughout, except where git-shell, git-cvsserver, git-upload-pack, git-receive-pack, and git-upload-archive are concerned, because those really live in the $PATH.
2010-01-10 00:33:00 +01:00
'git merge-file' is designed to be a minimal clone of RCS 'merge'; that is, it
manpages: italicize nongit command names (if they are in teletype font) Some manual pages use teletype font to set command names. We change them to use italics, instead. This creates a visual distinction between names of commands and command lines that can be typed at the command line. It is also more consistent with other man pages outside Git. In this patch, the commands named are non-git commands like bash. Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@uchicago.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-07-03 07:55:07 +02:00
implements all of RCS 'merge''s functionality which is needed by
Documentation: rename gitlink macro to linkgit Between AsciiDoc 8.2.2 and 8.2.3, the following change was made to the stock Asciidoc configuration: @@ -149,7 +153,10 @@ # Inline macros. # Backslash prefix required for escape processing. # (?s) re flag for line spanning. -(?su)[\\]?(?P<name>\w(\w|-)*?):(?P<target>\S*?)(\[(?P<attrlist>.*?)\])= + +# Explicit so they can be nested. +(?su)[\\]?(?P<name>(http|https|ftp|file|mailto|callto|image|link)):(?P<target>\S*?)(\[(?P<attrlist>.*?)\])= + # Anchor: [[[id]]]. Bibliographic anchor. (?su)[\\]?\[\[\[(?P<attrlist>[\w][\w-]*?)\]\]\]=anchor3 # Anchor: [[id,xreflabel]] This default regex now matches explicit values, and unfortunately in this case gitlink was being matched by just 'link', causing the wrong inline macro template to be applied. By renaming the macro, we can avoid being matched by the wrong regex. Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2007-12-29 07:20:38 +01:00
linkgit:git[1].
Document git-merge-file Most of this is derived from the documentation of RCS merge. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-16 12:22:18 +01:00
OPTIONS
-------
-L <label>::
This option may be given up to three times, and
specifies labels to be used in place of the
corresponding file names in conflict reports. That is,
Documentation: be consistent about "git-" versus "git " Since the git-* commands are not installed in $(bindir), using "git-command <parameters>" in examples in the documentation is not a good idea. On the other hand, it is nice to be able to refer to each command using one hyphenated word. (There is no escaping it, anyway: man page names cannot have spaces in them.) This patch retains the dash in naming an operation, command, program, process, or action. Complete command lines that can be entered at a shell (i.e., without options omitted) are made to use the dashless form. The changes consist only of replacing some spaces with hyphens and vice versa. After a "s/ /-/g", the unpatched and patched versions are identical. Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@uchicago.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-06-30 08:09:04 +02:00
`git merge-file -L x -L y -L z a b c` generates output that
Document git-merge-file Most of this is derived from the documentation of RCS merge. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-16 12:22:18 +01:00
looks like it came from files x, y and z instead of
from files a, b and c.
-p::
Send results to standard output instead of overwriting
`<current-file>`.
-q::
Improve language in git-merge.txt and related docs Improve some minor language and format issues like hyphenation, phrases, spacing, word order, comma, attributes. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-12-09 07:23:51 +01:00
Quiet; do not warn about conflicts.
Document git-merge-file Most of this is derived from the documentation of RCS merge. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-16 12:22:18 +01:00
Documentation/git-merge-file: document option "--diff3" The option "--diff3" was added to "git merge-file" in e0af48e (xdiff-merge: optionally show conflicts in "diff3 -m" style) but it was never documented in "Documentation/git-merge-file.txt". Add documentation for this option. Signed-off-by: Ralf Thielow <ralf.thielow@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-08-09 20:09:32 +02:00
--diff3::
Show conflicts in "diff3" style.
git-merge-file --ours, --theirs Sometimes people want their conflicting merges autoresolved by favouring upstream changes. The standard answer they are given is to run "git diff --name-only | xargs git checkout MERGE_HEAD --" in such a case. This is to accept automerge results for the paths that are fully resolved automatically, while taking their version of the file in full for paths that have conflicts. This is problematic on two counts. One is that this is not exactly what these people want. It discards all changes they did on their branch for any paths that conflicted. They usually want to salvage as much automerge result as possible in a conflicted file, and want to take the upstream change only in the conflicted part. This patch teaches two new modes of operation to the lowest-lever merge machinery, xdl_merge(). Instead of leaving the conflicted lines from both sides enclosed in <<<, ===, and >>> markers, the conflicts are resolved favouring our side or their side of changes. A larger problem is that this tends to encourage a bad workflow by allowing people to record such a mixed up half-merged result as a full commit without auditing. This commit does not tackle this issue at all. In git, we usually give long enough rope to users with strange wishes as long as the risky features are not enabled by default, and this is such a risky feature. Signed-off-by: Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-06-20 09:17:27 +02:00
--ours::
--theirs::
merge-file: add option to select union merge favor Signed-off-by: Bert Wesarg <bert.wesarg@googlemail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-03-01 22:46:28 +01:00
--union::
git-merge-file --ours, --theirs Sometimes people want their conflicting merges autoresolved by favouring upstream changes. The standard answer they are given is to run "git diff --name-only | xargs git checkout MERGE_HEAD --" in such a case. This is to accept automerge results for the paths that are fully resolved automatically, while taking their version of the file in full for paths that have conflicts. This is problematic on two counts. One is that this is not exactly what these people want. It discards all changes they did on their branch for any paths that conflicted. They usually want to salvage as much automerge result as possible in a conflicted file, and want to take the upstream change only in the conflicted part. This patch teaches two new modes of operation to the lowest-lever merge machinery, xdl_merge(). Instead of leaving the conflicted lines from both sides enclosed in <<<, ===, and >>> markers, the conflicts are resolved favouring our side or their side of changes. A larger problem is that this tends to encourage a bad workflow by allowing people to record such a mixed up half-merged result as a full commit without auditing. This commit does not tackle this issue at all. In git, we usually give long enough rope to users with strange wishes as long as the risky features are not enabled by default, and this is such a risky feature. Signed-off-by: Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-06-20 09:17:27 +02:00
Instead of leaving conflicts in the file, resolve conflicts
merge-file: add option to select union merge favor Signed-off-by: Bert Wesarg <bert.wesarg@googlemail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2010-03-01 22:46:28 +01:00
favouring our (or their or both) side of the lines.
git-merge-file --ours, --theirs Sometimes people want their conflicting merges autoresolved by favouring upstream changes. The standard answer they are given is to run "git diff --name-only | xargs git checkout MERGE_HEAD --" in such a case. This is to accept automerge results for the paths that are fully resolved automatically, while taking their version of the file in full for paths that have conflicts. This is problematic on two counts. One is that this is not exactly what these people want. It discards all changes they did on their branch for any paths that conflicted. They usually want to salvage as much automerge result as possible in a conflicted file, and want to take the upstream change only in the conflicted part. This patch teaches two new modes of operation to the lowest-lever merge machinery, xdl_merge(). Instead of leaving the conflicted lines from both sides enclosed in <<<, ===, and >>> markers, the conflicts are resolved favouring our side or their side of changes. A larger problem is that this tends to encourage a bad workflow by allowing people to record such a mixed up half-merged result as a full commit without auditing. This commit does not tackle this issue at all. In git, we usually give long enough rope to users with strange wishes as long as the risky features are not enabled by default, and this is such a risky feature. Signed-off-by: Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-06-20 09:17:27 +02:00
Document git-merge-file Most of this is derived from the documentation of RCS merge. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-16 12:22:18 +01:00
EXAMPLES
--------
docs: put listed example commands in backticks Many examples of git command invocation are given in asciidoc listing blocks, which makes them monospaced and avoids further interpretation of special characters. Some manpages make a list of examples, like: git foo:: Run git foo. git foo -q:: Use the "-q" option. to quickly show many variants. However, they can sometimes be hard to read, because they are shown in a proportional-width font (so, for example, seeing the difference between "-- foo" and "--foo" can be difficult). This patch puts all such examples into backticks, which gives the equivalent formatting to a listing block (i.e., monospaced and without character interpretation). As a bonus, this also fixes an example in the git-push manpage, in which "git push origin :::" was accidentally considered a newly-indented list, and not a list item with "git push origin :" in it. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2011-08-04 04:13:29 +02:00
`git merge-file README.my README README.upstream`::
Document git-merge-file Most of this is derived from the documentation of RCS merge. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-16 12:22:18 +01:00
combines the changes of README.my and README.upstream since README,
tries to merge them and writes the result into README.my.
docs: put listed example commands in backticks Many examples of git command invocation are given in asciidoc listing blocks, which makes them monospaced and avoids further interpretation of special characters. Some manpages make a list of examples, like: git foo:: Run git foo. git foo -q:: Use the "-q" option. to quickly show many variants. However, they can sometimes be hard to read, because they are shown in a proportional-width font (so, for example, seeing the difference between "-- foo" and "--foo" can be difficult). This patch puts all such examples into backticks, which gives the equivalent formatting to a listing block (i.e., monospaced and without character interpretation). As a bonus, this also fixes an example in the git-push manpage, in which "git push origin :::" was accidentally considered a newly-indented list, and not a list item with "git push origin :" in it. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2011-08-04 04:13:29 +02:00
`git merge-file -L a -L b -L c tmp/a123 tmp/b234 tmp/c345`::
Document git-merge-file Most of this is derived from the documentation of RCS merge. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-12-16 12:22:18 +01:00
merges tmp/a123 and tmp/c345 with the base tmp/b234, but uses labels
`a` and `c` instead of `tmp/a123` and `tmp/c345`.
GIT
---
documentation: move git(7) to git(1) As the "git" man page describes the "git" command at the end-user level, it seems better to move it to man section 1. Signed-off-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-06-06 09:07:32 +02:00
Part of the linkgit:git[1] suite
Copy permalink