On 18/11/2010 22:50, GuilhemBichot wrote:
> I am using the latest lp:bzr, which has the fix above. I am
> re-running the same commands as when I filed the bug report, with the
> same revisions. I observe that indeed now, "bzr merge ../mm" does not
> produce an error anymore. However, it ends with 453 conflicts.
I did try this merge to test my patch. I ran it the same problem, and
investigated why. The mm branch allready has storage/innobase, which is
added by the jp branch, and unfortunatly has different file ids.
On 18/11/2010 22:50, GuilhemBichot wrote:
> I am using the latest lp:bzr, which has the fix above. I am
> re-running the same commands as when I filed the bug report, with the
> same revisions. I observe that indeed now, "bzr merge ../mm" does not
> produce an error anymore. However, it ends with 453 conflicts.
I did try this merge to test my patch. I ran it the same problem, and
investigated why. The mm branch allready has storage/innobase, which is
added by the jp branch, and unfortunatly has different file ids.