Ah ok. That make sense. Yes, the changes I pulled out between revision 2 and 3, did involve files that had been modified in later revisions. I don't think they're related to bzr-svn, the test I did was on a test bzr branch, I wasn't backing it in svn. The files that got reverted were test files with just a single line in them, and there are really only two files in the branch. So, any changes to them would be seen as conflicts correct? Thanks again for all the help! Eric <div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 5:57 PM, Robert Collins <<a href="mailto:robert.collins@canonical.com">robert.collins@canonical.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div class="im">On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 17:45 -0700, Eric Berry wrote: > Hi Martin, thanks for the quick response! > > I tried this: > bzr merge -r 3..2 . > > This resulted in the changed files being marked as having conflicts. > > If I run a bzr status just before performing the merge it shows that I > do not have any uncommitted changes. > > Is there a way to not have to resolve the conflicted files? </div>This almost certainly means you have had other changes after rev 3 that conflict with the change in rev 3. -Rob </blockquote></div> -- Learn from the past. Live in the present. Plan for the future. 11101000 <a href="http://www.townsfolkdesigns.com/blogs/elberry">http://www.townsfolkdesigns.com/blogs/elberry</a>