threads / discuss / 12041

Best way to specify all local branches and all remote branches.

Subject: Best way to specify all local branches and all remote branches.

## tl;dr

6 messages between Feb 11, 2008 and Feb 11, 2008.

replies: 5people: 3as markdown or json

Paul Gardiner· Feb 11, 2008, 18:51 UTC · lore

New to git, and often finding it hard to specify the correct refs for a command. Here's an example where I was converting all the files in all the commits from unix line endings to DOS line endings. You can see I've ended up using cd and ls. I'm sure there must be a better way.

$ cd /home/public/tmp/git/
$ yes |rm -r vdos32
$ git clone /export/git/vdos32.git vdos32
$ cd vdos32/
$ for f in `(cd /export/git/vdos32.git/refs/heads; ls)|sed -e
    '/master/d' -e '/origin/d'`; do git fetch origin $f:$f; done
$ git-filter-branch --tag-name-filter cat --tree-filter 'find . -type f
    ! -name \*.gif ! -name \*.ico|xargs unix2dos -q' `(cd
    .git/refs/heads;ls)`

With git-filter-branch, I'm surprised I can't use --all. The docs suggest that A --not B is permitted. I've also seen refs/heads/* used in the docs but never managed to get it to work. Most greatful for any advice.

P.
Jakub Narebski· Feb 11, 2008, 19:10 UTC · re: Paul Gardiner · lore

Re: Best way to specify all local branches and all remote branches.

Paul Gardiner <osronline@glidos.net> writes:
Show 5 quoted lines
> New to git, and often finding it hard to specify the correct
> refs for a command. Here's an example where I was converting
> all the files in all the commits from unix line endings to
> DOS line endings. You can see I've ended up using cd and ls.
> I'm sure there must be a better way.
git-for-each-ref, git-show-ref, git-ls-remote / git-peek-remote.
Show 9 quoted lines
> $ cd /home/public/tmp/git/
> $ yes |rm -r vdos32
> $ git clone /export/git/vdos32.git vdos32
> $ cd vdos32/
> $ for f in `(cd /export/git/vdos32.git/refs/heads; ls)|sed -e
>     '/master/d' -e '/origin/d'`; do git fetch origin $f:$f; done
> $ git-filter-branch --tag-name-filter cat --tree-filter 'find . -type f
>     ! -name \*.gif ! -name \*.ico|xargs unix2dos -q' `(cd
>     .git/refs/heads;ls)`

If you want to fetch all branches, you can specify globbing refspec; of course if you use separate remotes layout, or mirror layout.

If you want to pass all branches to git command, usually --all would
be enough (sometimes --heads).
 
> With git-filter-branch, I'm surprised I can't use --all.

git-filter-branch is about single branch; I'm not sure if it should support --all.

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Poland
ShadeHawk on #git
Paul Gardiner· Feb 11, 2008, 19:40 UTC · re: Jakub Narebski · lore

Re: Best way to specify all local branches and all remote branches.

Jakub Narebski wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> Paul Gardiner <osronline@glidos.net> writes:
> 
>> New to git, and often finding it hard to specify the correct
>> refs for a command. Here's an example where I was converting
>> all the files in all the commits from unix line endings to
>> DOS line endings. You can see I've ended up using cd and ls.
>> I'm sure there must be a better way.
> 
> git-for-each-ref, git-show-ref, git-ls-remote / git-peek-remote.
Ah right, those look hellishly useful, thanks.
Show 12 quoted lines
>> $ cd /home/public/tmp/git/
>> $ yes |rm -r vdos32
>> $ git clone /export/git/vdos32.git vdos32
>> $ cd vdos32/
>> $ for f in `(cd /export/git/vdos32.git/refs/heads; ls)|sed -e
>>     '/master/d' -e '/origin/d'`; do git fetch origin $f:$f; done
>> $ git-filter-branch --tag-name-filter cat --tree-filter 'find . -type f
>>     ! -name \*.gif ! -name \*.ico|xargs unix2dos -q' `(cd
>>     .git/refs/heads;ls)`
> 
> If you want to fetch all branches, you can specify globbing refspec;
> of course if you use separate remotes layout, or mirror layout.

I think I tried that with my line 5 above. I tried refs/heads/*:refs/heads/* as the ref spec. Should something like that work?

Show 7 quoted lines
> If you want to pass all branches to git command, usually --all would
> be enough (sometimes --heads).
>  
>> With git-filter-branch, I'm surprised I can't use --all.
> 
> git-filter-branch is about single branch; I'm not sure if it should
> support --all.

It seems to work with multiple branches, and I think it's important that it does, because as far as I can tell, that's the only way to filter a whole repository without visiting some commits more than once. Certainly my command, using cd/ls, worked and visited each commit exactly once.

Cheers,
	Paul.
Paul Gardiner· Feb 11, 2008, 21:00 UTC · re: Johannes Schindelin · lore

Re: Best way to specify all local branches and all remote branches.

Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Show 11 quoted lines
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2008, Jakub Narebski wrote:
> 
>> git-filter-branch is about single branch;
> 
> No.
> 
>> I'm not sure if it should support --all.
> 
> It does.

Yep, it does. I'd forgotten how to drive the shell. It works if I put -- --all.

Turns out that isn't what I want though. I want just the local branches. Still can't find a way to do it other than my cd/ls thing.

Jakub Narebski· Feb 11, 2008, 21:34 UTC · re: Paul Gardiner · lore

Re: Best way to specify all local branches and all remote branches.

Paul Gardiner <osronline@glidos.net> writes:
Show 13 quoted lines
> Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Feb 2008, Jakub Narebski wrote:
>>
>>> git-filter-branch [...] should support --all.
>>
>> It does.
> 
> Yep, it does. I'd forgotten how to drive the shell. It works if
> I put -- --all.
> 
> Turns out that isn't what I want though. I want just the local
> branches. Still can't find a way to do it other than my cd/ls
> thing.
I wrote: git-for-each-ref(1). See documentation, please.
  $(git for-each-ref --shell --format="%(refname)" "refs/heads/*")
-- 
Jakub Narebski
Poland
ShadeHawk on #git

← back to recent threads