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