Yes it's the standard unstable version. I wanted to find out how
duplicate patches are handled by changes FILE. In this case, there
is no file called A in the repo (it was renamed to C). But the
duplicate patch at the end still refers to A. It seems like the changes
code does not take the context of the duplicate patch into account.
Here is the sequence of commands to create the repo:
/------
mkdir 1; mkdir 2
for R in 1 2; do (cd $R; darcs init; touch A; darcs add A; darcs rec -a
-m "add A $R"); done
cd 1
darcs pull -a ../2
darcs changes -v A
\--------
It's not that critical and the other case which I consider more
important works:
darcs changes -v C
Changes to C:
Thu Mar 25 11:55:45 CET 2010 Benedikt Schmidt <beschmi@gmail.com>
* add A 2
duplicate
|move ./C ./A
|rmfile ./A
|:
addfile ./A
Thu Mar 25 11:56:06 CET 2010 Benedikt Schmidt <beschmi@gmail.com>
* move in 1
move ./A ./C
Thu Mar 25 11:55:45 CET 2010 Benedikt Schmidt <beschmi@gmail.com>
* add A 1
addfile ./A
Even though the duplicate patch refers to A, it is also shown as a patch
that touches C. This is correct if you take the context into account.
Best,
Benedikt
|