[darcs-users] Re: Request for comments: command description and documentation patch

David Roundy droundy at abridgegame.org
Tue Mar 8 13:30:29 UTC 2005

On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 04:25:36PM +0100, Peter Hercek wrote:
> David Roundy wrote:
> >>hunk ./Resolve.lhs 40
> >>- "Resolve conflicts."
> >>+ "Record the conflicting patch and its resolution."
> >
> >
> >This isn't what resolve does--it doesn't record a patch.  It really just
> >marks the working directory to indicate any conflicts that may not be
> >apparent.
> I'm curious where I got my text :) I have a feeling I read it somewhere
>  but it seems to be ok in the documenatation now.
> What did you mean by "... indicate any conflicts that may not be apparent"?
> ... expecially I'm curious about the world "apparent" in that context.

It's a bit complicated, which is why it's grouped with the "Rarely needed
and obscure commands" in darcs.lhs.

If you use apply with

      --allow-conflicts              allow conflicts, but don't mark them

or if you pull and then run revert -a, you may have conflicts in your
repository, but not have any way of knowing what they are.  If you're in
this situation, resolve will mark the conflicts in the same way that darcs
pull would.  For ordinary hunk conflicts, this means marking with "v v v"
etc.  For other sorts of conflicts (binary patches, adds and mvs, etc),
darcs simply chooses one of the patch sequences and applies that.  In any
case, the resulting "resolution" will show up when you run whatsnew, and
should give you an idea what happened.  And if you then were to simply
record (after running revert -a followed by resolve), your conflict would
be considered "resolved", and wouldn't show up as a conflict later.
David Roundy

More information about the darcs-users mailing list