From: Yi, EungJun Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 12:25:44 GMT Subject: Re: Finding all branches(remote and local) include given commit? Message-ID: 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 : > 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 >