threads / discuss / 21113

Figuring out which patches have been applied

Subject: Figuring out which patches have been applied

## tl;dr

3 messages between Oct 2, 2009 and Oct 2, 2009.

replies: 2people: 3as markdown or json

Jon Smirl· Oct 2, 2009, 14:36 UTC · lore

I have a stack of 100 patches against 2.6.30. A lot of these got merged between 2.6.30-32. How can I tell which ones have been applied?

It doesn't work to check if patch A has been applied to 2.6.32. Other patches may have been applied on top of patch A obscuring it.

Once solution would be to rebase the patch stack forward one commit at a time. That solves the problem of later patches obscuring patch A. Is there a better way to do this?

-- 
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl@gmail.com
Julian Phillips· Oct 2, 2009, 18:45 UTC · re: Jon Smirl · lore

Re: Figuring out which patches have been applied

On Fri, 2 Oct 2009, Jon Smirl wrote:
Show 10 quoted lines
> I have a stack of 100 patches against 2.6.30. A lot of these got
> merged between 2.6.30-32.  How can I tell which ones have been
> applied?
>
> It doesn't work to check if patch A has been applied to 2.6.32. Other
> patches may have been applied on top of patch A obscuring it.
>
> Once solution would be to rebase the patch stack forward one commit at
> a time. That solves the problem of later patches obscuring patch A. Is
> there a better way to do this?

Have you tried using git-cherry? I belive that it was intended for this purpose?

-- 
Julian

  ---
Progress might have been all right once, but it's gone on too long.
 		-- Ogden Nash
skillzero@gmail.com· Oct 2, 2009, 19:16 UTC · re: Jon Smirl · lore

Re: Figuring out which patches have been applied

On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 7:36 AM, Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 10 quoted lines
> I have a stack of 100 patches against 2.6.30. A lot of these got
> merged between 2.6.30-32.  How can I tell which ones have been
> applied?
>
> It doesn't work to check if patch A has been applied to 2.6.32. Other
> patches may have been applied on top of patch A obscuring it.
>
> Once solution would be to rebase the patch stack forward one commit at
> a time. That solves the problem of later patches obscuring patch A. Is
> there a better way to do this?

There may be a better way, but I needed to do a similar thing with commits that were cherry-pick'd so I wrote a simple git-contains-equivalent script to search for equivalent patch ID's given a commit ID. You could do something like that, but using git-patch-id as the source instead getting it from an existing commit like the following script does.

#!/bin/bash
set -o pipefail
searchCommitID=`git rev-parse $1`
searchPatchID=`git show $searchCommitID | git patch-id`
if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
	exit 1
fi
searchPatchID=${searchPatchID% *}
echo "Searching for equivalents to commit $searchCommitID (patch
$searchPatchID)..."
git log --all -p | git patch-id | grep $searchPatchID |
while read patchID commitID; do
	if [ "$commitID" = "$searchCommitID" ]; then
		echo "Exact commit $commitID is on the following branches:"
	else
		echo "Equivalent commit $commitID is on the following branches:"
	fi
	git branch -a --contains $commitID
done

← back to recent threads