Linas Vepstas wrote:
"git branch" shows that I'm on "upstream". So I performed a "git pull"
(without any additional arguments) assuming that it would sync to your
"upstream" branch. And so my email was based on this.
Some googling seems to show that "git pull" has a bug/feature of
ignoring the branch that one is working in, and pulling "master"
no matter what. I have no clue why; this seems broken to me.
So ... let me try again ...
git pull git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jgarzik/netdev-2.6 upstream
...
Automatic merge failed; fix up by hand
Unfortunately git isn't the greatest for saying "just give me what is on
the remote", since each repository is an independent peer.
You need to:
* grab the latest torvalds/linux-2.6.git
* erase local netdev-2.6
* clone to create local netdev-2.6:
URL=git//git.kernel.org/.../jgarzik/netdev-2.6
git-clone --reference linux-2.6 $URL netdev-2.6
* that creates 'master' branch, which always equals vanilla upstream
* now create a local upstream branch:
git checkout -b upstream master
* and finally, pull remote upstream branch into local upstream branch:
git pull $URL upstream:upstream
Occasionally the remote 'upstream' will get "rebased", which means is
has been completely replaced by a new linear history. If you pull
'upstream' after a rebase, into a local 'upstream', git will attempt to
merge the same patches all over again, with disastrous results.
I wish there was a git option to "just make my shit look like the
remote, dammit!" The above is the "easiest" way I know how to do that.
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
