GIT rebase changes

[Michael Stefaniuc]

I hate to reply to myself, but ...

Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
> Mike McCormack wrote:
> 
>> The GIT guys have made rebase and pull incompatible, and to use rebase 
>> (which is likely what we want to do for Wine), you must use "fetch" 
>> then "rebase", not "pull" (which does a merge).
> 
> Depends if you want to keep your old history or not. "git pull" works 
> nicely.
> 
>> See:  http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/365410
>>
>> The error message that you get if you use "pull" then try to "rebase" 
>> with newer version of GIT is pretty useless:
> 
> I run into this yesterday. My master had the same code but different 
> history than origin. Did a git rebase (after branching my master so i 
> can keep my old history) and expected it to make master identical to 
> origin. I know i can achieve the same by copying the origin head over to 
> the master head but that would be like cheating.
> 
> I'm still pondering what makes more sense:
> - to keep my old history, or
And this screws you up when you do git-format-patch. My VarCmp patches 
in my master tree where composed out of a ton of separate small patches 
(took me some time to have that function figured out) and now 
git-format-patch dumped those out too even that my master branch and 
origin where code wise the same. Quite annoying.

> - rebase to origin every now and then to easier spot the differences 
> between master and origin.
Mike, you were right, "git rebase" is what we want to use. But if you do 
not have patches sent to upstream "git pull" works too and it's faster 
to type.

bye
	michael
-- 
Michael Stefaniuc               Tel.: +49-711-96437-199
Sr. Network Engineer            Fax.: +49-711-96437-111
Red Hat GmbH                    Email: mstefani at redhat.com
Hauptstaetterstr. 58            http://www.redhat.de/
D-70178 Stuttgart