top button
Flag Notify
    Connect to us
      Facebook Login
      Site Registration

Facebook Login
Site Registration

GIT: Inexplicable merge conflict produced when when lines next to each other are changed

+2 votes

I posted this question to StackOverflow a while ago but no one answered it so I thought I'd try here.

Let's say I have a file with this content in master:

Line 1
Line 2
Line 3
Line 4 

Now say I create and checkout a new branch called Test. In this branch I change the file to this:

Line 1
Line 2
Line 3 Modified
Line 4 

and I commit this and switch back to master. In master I change the file to:

Line 1
Line 2
Line 3
Line 4 Modified 

and I commit. Now if I merge branch Test into master, I get a conflict.

Why can't git auto resolve this, as those are two entirely independent lines? If I tell git to edit conflicts using BeyondCompare as the difftool, BeyondCompare autoresolves this without even telling the user, since this isn't a real conflict (other merge tools we use at our company do so also). Is there a way to get git to autoresolve these?

I've tried the recursive and resolve merge strategies but neither do it.

It's an issue in our company because there are certain files where multiple developers change lines in close proximity and this causes many unnecessary conflicts when they pull.

posted Apr 28, 2015 by anonymous

Looking for an answer?  Promote on:
Facebook Share Button Twitter Share Button LinkedIn Share Button

Similar Questions
+3 votes

I cloned a new tree, made changes to file readme.txt meantime readme.txt in the remote has changed at the same location. When I do a git pull I got merge conflicts, I resolved the conflicts and did a 'git commit' now I did git rebase, somehow I'm seeing the conflict again, now I fixed the conflict and did 'git rebase --continue' the conflict shows up again.

How can I get around this, am I doing something wrong, or is there a bug in git ?

+2 votes

In the past, when we do the merge in git, if conflicts occurred, when we commit, the conflict list will be appended to the default commit message automatically.


Today, after using Git 2.3.0 for a merge, it seems now the conflict list was commented out by default.

I just searched a bit in the release notes, don't know whether below item has to do with this change.

"git interpret-trailers" learned to properly handle the "Conflicts:"
block at the end.

We quite rely on the default generated conflict list to reminder us about the "history".

Is this the default behavior now (conflict list commented out)?

0 votes

At $dayjob we maintain internal forks of the a number of upstream repositories.

Unsurprisingly updating these forks can be extremely problematic, especially when it's only one person doing the merge. Fortunately most of us are in the same physical location so it is possible to drag in someone who knows more about the code than the person merging but I can't see that scaling with remote developers.

Is there any way where we could share the conflict resolution around but still end up with a single merge commit. I'm thinking of something like the following workflow

developer A:
git merge $upstream

git mergetool ...

git commit -m "WIP: Merge upstream" --something-like--all-but-not

developer B:
git pull developer_A
git reset HEAD^

git push

Any thoughts on if something like this is currently possible? Is this something other git users would find useful?

0 votes

I work on some files and push/merge them to the remote server. Sometimes I get merge conflicts on those files and have to fix them. That's completely fine. I get that.

What I don't understand is that sometimes during this process I will get merge conflicts in files _I have never touched_. In fact they are in a completely different series of directories to the one I am working on and someone else project entirely. How am I meant to know how to fix these? I dont know what the other developer wanted to do and if they have done it right.

I thought git only merged/pushed the files you have changed? If someone else has changed Group A files on the remote repo, why must I change my local Group A files when I am _pushing _completely different set of Group B files?

Sure, Id understand if I were pulling files down to my local and had to resolve merge conflicts then, but this isn't happening when I push the files up.

Any help or advice is much appreciated. Sorry if I sound frustrated - I am really trying hard to get my head round this whole git thing but its just so weird.

Contact Us
+91 9880187415
#280, 3rd floor, 5th Main
6th Sector, HSR Layout
Karnataka INDIA.