Monticello Qs
Ned Konz
ned at bike-nomad.com
Thu Aug 7 23:17:34 UTC 2003
On Thursday 07 August 2003 03:39 pm, Daniel Vainsencher wrote:
> I loaded the RB from SM. Fixed various KCP issues. Then loaded MC,
> then loaded the previous RB .mcv. I got warned about spurious
> conflicts, proceeded.
>
> Then the conflict list included the expected changes, as conflicts,
> and also some class extensions - stuff that hadn't changed at all.
> These showed up as regular list items - not marked as conflicts,
> and I had no choice to reject them or not. Are these the spurious
> conflicts? these seem too spurious - it is the same code. And
> they're not conflicts. I'm probably missing something here...
What packages were they in?
If they weren't in Refactory.st, I don't know (though note that
Refactory.st overwrites some newer methods with older ones).
However, if they were in the test packages, it could have been the
spurious line endings:
$ file *
AbstractVariableTestData.st: ASCII C++ program text, with CRLF, LF
line terminators
ChildrenToSiblingTest.st: ASCII C++ program text, with CRLF, LF
line terminators
InlineMethodTest.st: ASCII C++ program text, with CRLF line
terminators
install: directory
Refactory.st: ASCII English text, with very long lines,
with CR line terminators
--
Ned Konz
http://bike-nomad.com
GPG key ID: BEEA7EFE
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|