# Common ancestor in merge diffs? 7 messages from 2009-01-26 to 2009-01-26. Participants: Daniel Barkalow, Johannes Schindelin, Linus Torvalds, Junio C Hamano. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/17377 ## Daniel Barkalow, 2009-01-26 18:41 Subject: Common ancestor in merge diffs? Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/alpine.LNX.1.00.0901261318030.19665%40iabervon.org ``` I was just doing an annoying merge (I'd reorganized code while other people made changes to it), and I kept having the problem that it was hard to figure out what each side had done. Is there some way to ask git for the diffs between the common ancestor (which is unique in my case, so it's actually useful) and each of the sides of the merge? Ideally, it would give essentially the converse of the --cc diff: first column is -stage 1 +stage 2; second column is -stage 1 +stage 3. I think this would generally be more useful than the current diff output for the unresolved portions (-stage 3 +working tree, -stage 2 +working tree) because you're generally quite familiar with the working tree (since you're trying to resolve there), and stage 1 is not obvious. -Daniel *This .sig left intentionally blank* ``` ## Johannes Schindelin, 2009-01-26 18:59 Subject: Re: Common ancestor in merge diffs? Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/alpine.DEB.1.00.0901261958320.25749%40intel-tinevez-2-302 In-Reply-To: ``` Hi, On Mon, 26 Jan 2009, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > I was just doing an annoying merge (I'd reorganized code while other > people made changes to it), and I kept having the problem that it was hard > to figure out what each side had done. Is there some way to ask git for > the diffs between the common ancestor (which is unique in my case, so it's > actually useful) and each of the sides of the merge? How about git diff HEAD...MERGE_HEAD and git diff MERGE_HEAD...HEAD ? I might have misunderstood, though. Ciao, Dscho ``` ## Linus Torvalds, 2009-01-26 19:05 Subject: Re: Common ancestor in merge diffs? Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/alpine.LFD.2.00.0901261100200.5284%40localhost.localdomain In-Reply-To: ``` On Mon, 26 Jan 2009, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > > I was just doing an annoying merge (I'd reorganized code while other > people made changes to it), and I kept having the problem that it was hard > to figure out what each side had done. Is there some way to ask git for > the diffs between the common ancestor (which is unique in my case, so it's > actually useful) and each of the sides of the merge? Ideally, it would > give essentially the converse of the --cc diff: first column is -stage 1 > +stage 2; second column is -stage 1 +stage 3. Have you tried "gitk --merge [filename]"? That's usually even more useful - because it doesn't just give a diff, it gives the actual commits that caused the conflict. That way you see what both sides of a merge tried to do.. It's what I do when encountering conflicts on the kernel (where I'm usually not the author of _either_ side of the code that causes a conflict), and it really is very powerful. That said, finding the diffs from the common case is pretty trivial too. Just do git diff MERGE_HEAD...HEAD [filename] and you'll get the diff from the common case to the HEAD, and if you switch them around, you'll get the diff from the common commit to the MERGE_HEAD. Note the _three_ dots. Linus ``` ## Daniel Barkalow, 2009-01-26 19:06 Subject: Re: Common ancestor in merge diffs? Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/alpine.LNX.1.00.0901261402120.19665%40iabervon.org In-Reply-To: ``` On Mon, 26 Jan 2009, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 26 Jan 2009, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > > > I was just doing an annoying merge (I'd reorganized code while other > > people made changes to it), and I kept having the problem that it was hard > > to figure out what each side had done. Is there some way to ask git for > > the diffs between the common ancestor (which is unique in my case, so it's > > actually useful) and each of the sides of the merge? > > How about > > git diff HEAD...MERGE_HEAD > > and > > git diff MERGE_HEAD...HEAD > > ? I might have misunderstood, though. That's definitely helpful information (and I'd forgotten about it; I was only thinking of the index). It would be helpful to get it in --cc form, though, rather than as two independant diffs. And it seems somewhat wasteful or something to not use the information in the index, although it's hard to get worked up about with git being blindingly fast anyway. -Daniel *This .sig left intentionally blank* ``` ## Daniel Barkalow, 2009-01-26 19:52 Subject: Re: Common ancestor in merge diffs? Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/alpine.LNX.1.00.0901261412110.19665%40iabervon.org In-Reply-To: ``` On Mon, 26 Jan 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, 26 Jan 2009, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > > > > I was just doing an annoying merge (I'd reorganized code while other > > people made changes to it), and I kept having the problem that it was hard > > to figure out what each side had done. Is there some way to ask git for > > the diffs between the common ancestor (which is unique in my case, so it's > > actually useful) and each of the sides of the merge? Ideally, it would > > give essentially the converse of the --cc diff: first column is -stage 1 > > +stage 2; second column is -stage 1 +stage 3. > > Have you tried "gitk --merge [filename]"? > > That's usually even more useful - because it doesn't just give a diff, it > gives the actual commits that caused the conflict. That way you see what > both sides of a merge tried to do.. It's what I do when encountering > conflicts on the kernel (where I'm usually not the author of _either_ side > of the code that causes a conflict), and it really is very powerful. That is really nice, and quite handy. I ended up getting approximately that effect with blame and show, but gitk is much easier. For some reason, I never think of the graphical tools. Is there an easy way of focusing on the changes that end up in a particular conflict? Half of the work was finding the right commit and finding the right part of the diff. -Daniel *This .sig left intentionally blank* ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2009-01-26 19:55 Subject: Re: Common ancestor in merge diffs? Message-ID: <7vhc3l6dvx.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/7vhc3l6dvx.fsf%40gitster.siamese.dyndns.org In-Reply-To: ``` Daniel Barkalow writes: > I was just doing an annoying merge (I'd reorganized code while other > people made changes to it), and I kept having the problem that it was hard > to figure out what each side had done. Is there some way to ask git for > the diffs between the common ancestor (which is unique in my case, so it's > actually useful) and each of the sides of the merge? Have you tried "git checkout --conflict=diff3 $that_conflicted_path"? ``` ## Linus Torvalds, 2009-01-26 20:54 Subject: Re: Common ancestor in merge diffs? Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/alpine.LFD.2.00.0901261241540.3465%40localhost.localdomain In-Reply-To: ``` On Mon, 26 Jan 2009, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > > That is really nice, and quite handy. I ended up getting approximately > that effect with blame and show, but gitk is much easier. For some reason, > I never think of the graphical tools. You can do the same thing on the command-line with just doing git log --merge [filename] but when doing conflict resolution you often do care (deeply) about the way the commits hang together, so the graphical tools really do end up giving you fundamentally interesting information that is hard to show in any readable way with just plain text. [ Yeah, there's "--graph", but it really loses out on the whole readability thing ] > Is there an easy way of focusing on the changes that end up in a > particular conflict? Half of the work was finding the right commit and > finding the right part of the diff. This is where the command line tools really help. What I do is to just fire up that "gitk" and 90% of the time the thing is clear from that. But _if_ it then is complex, and has a ton of changes to the same file that really aren't that interesting, doing a git log --merge -S'interesting-part-goes-here' [filename] in another window tends to be a good idea. That way you get the commits that just touch that string, and you can do the whole 'goto-SHA1' in the gitk window to see them there. Sometimes, "git blame -C " is also a good tool to have around. You seem to have found it already. One usage case is git blame -C $(git merge-base HEAD MERGE_HEAD).. filename which then high-lights the lines changed from the merge-base to the HEAD (change it to "..MERGE_HEAD" to see what changed to MERGE_HEAD), but quite frankly, I tend to use "git blame" more as a tool _after_ the merge, when I noticed that I merged things wrong and go back and try to figure out what caused the problem. Linus ```