在源代码树中,合并差异中哪个是 "mine",哪个是 "theirs"?
In source tree, which is "mine" and which is "theirs" in merge diff?
我正在合并两个分支。我假设我现在在 HEAD 分支上。当我只想选择文件的一个分支版本时。想挑哪个看内容,不看树枝。
例如在下图中我想选择第二行:
但是第二行是从哪一行来的呢?我不太明白这里程序的输出。
分支名称就在冲突标记旁边。您上次结帐时使用的是 "ours",您在 git merge
命令中提到的是他们的。
事实上,我只能引用 git help merge
:
By default, Git uses the same style as the one used by the "merge" program from the RCS suite to present such a
conflicted hunk, like this:
Here are lines that are either unchanged from the common
ancestor, or cleanly resolved because only one side changed.
<<<<<<< yours:sample.txt
Conflict resolution is hard;
let´s go shopping.
=======
Git makes conflict resolution easy.
>>>>>>> theirs:sample.txt
And here is another line that is cleanly resolved or unmodified.
The area where a pair of conflicting changes happened is marked with markers <<<<<<<, =======, and >>>>>>>. The part
before the ======= is typically your side, and the part afterwards is typically their side.
我用 Sourcetree(4.1.0,2021 年 3 月 24 日)做了一个小测试,至少澄清了这个用例
branch mineA, text "a"
branch mineB, text "b"
current branch: mineB
merge mineA into mineB
resolve conflict using 'mine'
text: "b"
我正在合并两个分支。我假设我现在在 HEAD 分支上。当我只想选择文件的一个分支版本时。想挑哪个看内容,不看树枝。
例如在下图中我想选择第二行:
但是第二行是从哪一行来的呢?我不太明白这里程序的输出。
分支名称就在冲突标记旁边。您上次结帐时使用的是 "ours",您在 git merge
命令中提到的是他们的。
事实上,我只能引用 git help merge
:
By default, Git uses the same style as the one used by the "merge" program from the RCS suite to present such a
conflicted hunk, like this:
Here are lines that are either unchanged from the common
ancestor, or cleanly resolved because only one side changed.
<<<<<<< yours:sample.txt
Conflict resolution is hard;
let´s go shopping.
=======
Git makes conflict resolution easy.
>>>>>>> theirs:sample.txt
And here is another line that is cleanly resolved or unmodified.
The area where a pair of conflicting changes happened is marked with markers <<<<<<<, =======, and >>>>>>>. The part
before the ======= is typically your side, and the part afterwards is typically their side.
我用 Sourcetree(4.1.0,2021 年 3 月 24 日)做了一个小测试,至少澄清了这个用例
branch mineA, text "a"
branch mineB, text "b"
current branch: mineB
merge mineA into mineB
resolve conflict using 'mine'
text: "b"