Re: Finding all branches(remote and local) include given commit?
- From
Yi, EungJun <semtlenori@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 12, 2012, 12:25 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAFT+Tg-cYCatcaP3fR7X7+GnpazUb3ys96A5AP6HTjvD_=+UyQ@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <1336824434.3002.17.camel@centaur.lab.cmartin.tk>
Wow, I should do like this:
$ git branch -a --contains 499e7b31509cfbb59dcb2a046f8e2fd1a3e73d6f * master remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master remotes/origin/master remotes/origin/next remotes/origin/pu
git-branch has '-a' but not '-all', and git-remote has '--all' but not '-a'.
This is a bit confusing for me. Why don't the two commands have the option under the same name?
2012/5/12 Carlos Martín Nieto <cmn@elego.de>:
Show 23 quoted lines
> On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 20:42 +0900, Yi, EungJun wrote: >> Is there any way to find remote and local branches include given commit? >> >> e.g. >> >> $ git branch --all --contains 499e7b31509cfbb59dcb2a046f8e2fd1a3e73d6f >> * master >> remotes/origin/next >> >> As you know, it does not work and "git branch --contains" finds only >> local branches. > > Works For Me. What version are you trying it with? Are you sure that > remote-tracking branches do contain that commit? > > From a quick look through the log and release notes, it was never > mentioned as a fix. The log contains 3f7701a4 from 2007 which fixes 'git > describe --all --contains' which, though unlikely, might be related. > This commit was however part of release 1.5.4, which makes it unlikely > you'd be using something older. > > cmn >