Re: Question about "git log --cherry"
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 11:14 AM, John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk> wrote:
Show 49 quoted lines
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 10:28:05AM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 10:11 AM, John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 07:09:03AM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:21 PM, John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk> wrote:
>> >> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 06:35:57PM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
>> >> >> I'm trying to use "git log --cherry ..." in order to display new, kept
>> >> >> and removed commits between two branches A and B.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> So commits which are only in B are considered new and should be marked
>> >> >> with '+'. Commits which are in both branches are marked with '=' but
>> >> >> only commit in branch B are shown. Eventually commits which are in A
>> >> >> but not in B anymore should be marked with '-'.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> So far I found this solution:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> $ git log --cherry-mark --right-only A...B
>> >> >> $ git log --cherry-pick --left-only A...B
>> >> >>
>> >> >> but I have to call twice git-log. This can be annoying since depending
>> >> >> on A and B, calling git-log can take time.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Is there another option that I'm missing which would do the job but
>> >> >> with only one call to git-log ?
>> >> >
>> >> > Does this do what you want?
>> >> >
>> >> > git log --cherry-mark --left-right A...B |
>> >> > sed -e '/^commit / {
>> >> > y/<>/-+/
>> >> > }'
>> >>
>> >> Nope because --left-right shows common commits (with '=' mark) that
>> >> belong to A *and* B, and I'd like to have only the ones in B.
>> >
>> > I think the only way you can address this is to post-process the result,
>> > I don't know any way to remove a left side commit only if it is
>> > patch-identical to a right side commit.
>> >
>> > It should be relatively easy to filter out any '=' commits that are in
>> > the output of "git rev-list --left-only A...B".
>>
>> yes that's what I'm doing but I was wondering if that's possible to do
>> that with only one run of git-log/git-rev-list.
>
> I don't think it is. But you only need to use the --cherry-mark option
> with one of the runs, so the other one should be very quick - the added
> work of calculating patch IDs slows down "git log" a lot.That's true, rev-list should be way faster. I think I'll do that.
Thanks.
--
Francis
