On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 04:36:27PM -0700, Alexey Neyman wrote:
> On 10/18/2016 02:02 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:42:40PM -0700, Alexey Neyman wrote:
> > > I just found what made it consider this directory different: it had build
> > > artifacts (*.o, *.d, etc) in that
On 10/18/2016 02:02 PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:42:40PM -0700, Alexey Neyman wrote:
I just found what made it consider this directory different: it had build
artifacts (*.o, *.d, etc) in that directory - once I ran 'make clean' prior
to merge, the merge proceeded smooth
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 01:42:40PM -0700, Alexey Neyman wrote:
> I just found what made it consider this directory different: it had build
> artifacts (*.o, *.d, etc) in that directory - once I ran 'make clean' prior
> to merge, the merge proceeded smoothly. Does the client consider unversioned
> f
On 10/18/2016 01:38 PM, Alexey Neyman wrote:
Hi,
Some time ago, in a separate email thread I was asked to try 1.10
client. I have been using it since, and today it showed an error
during merge:
Checking r12300... done
Tree conflict on '':
Directory merged from
'^/trunk/@12172'
to
'^/trunk/@1
4 matches
Mail list logo