On Wednesday, 28 February 2007 at 22:30, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > On 2007-02-28 13:11:02 +0900, TAKAHASHI Tamotsu wrote: > > Hi Brendan, > > > > * Tue Feb 27 2007 Brendan Cully <brendan@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > For the record, to revert the diff: hg diff -r 4793:4792 | patch -p1. > > > There was a minor conflict in UPDATING, easily fixed. hg backout would > > > have done about the same thing. > > > > Thanks, I didn't know both reverse-diff and backout. > > Now I like Mercurial more than ever. > > And I'd better read the whole manual. > > Wouldn't "hg merge" be a better solution? (Perhaps no differences here, > but I wonder if diff/patch still works with binary files or when files > are copied, removed and so on.) hg backout uses the merge machinery. It updates to the revision to be backed out, runs hg revert -r <parent>, commits, and then merges with tip. So yes, it is a bit safer in general. For most cases (at least in mutt), it doesn't make much difference. hg's diff and import machinery understand extended patch syntax that supports binary files and copies, but it needs to be enabled with the --git flag.
Attachment:
pgpfUvTLnVHBY.pgp
Description: PGP signature