[darcs-users] Re: A couple of pre-newbie questions
areiner at tph.tuwien.ac.at
Sat Mar 5 21:15:53 UTC 2005
Thanks for your most helpful answers!
[Tommy Pettersson <ptp at lysator.liu.se>, Sat, 5 Mar 2005 08:35:00 +0100]:
> (I wrote some of this reply before Mark replied, so I might
> be repeating some of his answers.)
Well, all the better for me - I still have to wrap my brain around
some of the concepts.
> When a conflict happens, darcs will insert both versions
> of conflicting lines in the file, with conflict markers
> around them. To resolve the conflict, just edit the file
> to what it really should look like and record. The record
> will result in a patch that tells darcs what these lines
> should look like, regardless of what any previous patches
> (conflicting or not) says.
But that, I suppose, does not happen with binary files, does it?
Conflict markers are something like vvvvv and ^^^^ lines, I think; is
there some way of customizing those?
> And I thought I was the only one on earth who used noweb... :-)
Well, maybe there are correlations between the exotic tools people
> You could instead carry context files and patch files.
> Before you leave home you 'darcs send' against the latest work
> context file to a patch file and also generate (darcs changes
> --context) a fresh home context file. Bring those two files to
> work. At work you apply the patch file and continue working.
> At closing time, 'darcs send' against the latest home context
> file (you brought with you) to a new patch file and generate a
> fresh work context file. Bring them home and repeat the cycle.
- A context is basically a list of applied patches? Or is that an
inventory? Is there a difference between those two?
- Is it correct that that method would create additional records
(i. e. I would have to record the current state of affairs before
`darcs send`)? In that case I would only carry around files that
actually changed (in the form of patches - in my current setup, even
generated files are copied to floppy), which is a big plus, but it
would create additional patches that result only from my going from
one place to another, which is something I would like to avoid. So
I would then have to `combine' all those patches again as described
in your earlier mail.
> > As you can see, many questions.
> And good questions too. I'll try to put some answers to them
> in the manual.
That would be a good idea - I did read it before asking, but a number
of things were still not clear.
More information about the darcs-users