ChatGPT解决这个技术问题 Extra ChatGPT

How do I see the commit differences between branches in git?

I'm on branch-X and have added a couple more commits on top of it. I want to see all the differences between MASTER and the branch that I am on in terms of commits. I could just do a

git checkout master
git log

and then a

git checkout branch-X
git log

and visually diff these, but I'm hoping for an easier, less error-prone method.

Would this statement be correct regarding answers on this page? (Most use git log.) A commit may be listed as if it were absent from one branch & present in the other even when both branches contain identical changes. Why? Git log relies on shas, which are computed using information that is volatile in normal operations (tree, timestamp, etc.). Example: cherry-picking a commit will create a new sha even though the changes within the commit are unaltered. While the OP asks specifically about "commits", most people care about "changes", a meaningful distinction. Git log may give misleading info.

P
Pablo Fernandez heelhook

You can easily do that with

git log master..branch-X

That will show you commits that branch-X has but master doesn't.


Is there an option if both branches contain commits that the other doesn't? Right now, you have to flip the arguments and run it both ways to see commits the other branch doesn't contain.
If you've already switched to branch-X you can use git log master..
@ElliottSlaughter: If you want to find commit that are either in master or branch-X but not both, you can use git log master...branch-X (three dots instead of two). See man gitrevisionsfor more info.
Its really only half the answer. Any commits in master that cause the branches to diverge won't show up
If commits have been cherry-picked from branch-X to master this won't filter them out. They will still be on the list of commits "In branch-X but not on master" even though they are actually in both..
M
Matthieu

You can get a really nice, visual output of how your branches differ with this

git log --graph --pretty=format:'%Cred%h%Creset -%C(yellow)%d%Creset %s %Cgreen(%cr)%Creset' --abbrev-commit --date=relative master..branch-X

That won't show you differences between branches though which is what is being asked.
git log --oneline --graph --all --decorate --abbrev-commit will give you a similar output in a shorter/more readable command
I like this: git log --all --graph --pretty=format:'%Cred%h%Creset -%C(yellow)%d%Creset %s %Cgreen(%cr)%Creset'
Extremely overcomplicated.
git log --oneline --graph --all --decorate is enough, --abbrev-commit is not required, --oneline is short for --pretty=oneline --abbrev-commit
z
zainengineer

I think it is matter of choice and context.I prefer to use

git log origin/master..origin/develop --oneline --no-merges

It will display commits in develop which are not in master branch.

If you want to see which files are actually modified use

git diff --stat origin/master..origin/develop --no-merges

If you don't specify arguments it will display the full diff. If you want to see visual diff, install meld on linux, or WinMerge on windows. Make sure they are the default difftools .Then use something like

git difftool -y origin/master..origin/develop --no-merges

In case you want to compare it with current branch. It is more convenient to use HEAD instead of branch name like use:

git fetch
git log origin/master..HEAD --oneline --no-merges

It will show you all the commits, about to be merged


If you compare a release branch that might have merges. You may like remove the merge commits (that do not add any value) with the help of the param --no-merges like: git log origin/master..HEAD --oneline --no-merges
m
mmaruska

I'd suggest the following to see the difference "in commits". For symmetric difference, repeat the command with inverted args:

git cherry -v master [your branch, or HEAD as default]

Is this different from git master..branch-X?
Sure, "git cherry" is smart: it translates from "commits" into "patches/diffs" and can avoid reporting a "patch" which is on both branches but applied in different order.
Outputs the SHA1 of every commit, prefixed with - for commits that have an equivalent in master, and + for commits that do not.
This works especially well with patch-based workflows where commits are often cherry-picked and applied to other branches.
m
mvp

If you are on Linux, gitg is way to go to do it very quickly and graphically.

If you insist on command line you can use:

git log --oneline --decorate

To make git log nicer by default, I typically set these global preferences:

git config --global log.decorate true
git config --global log.abbrevCommit true

s
snowcamel

if you want to use gitk:

gitk master..branch-X

it has a nice old school GUi


Can gitk open in dark-mode?
just invert the colors of the window
C
Community

Not the perfect answer but works better for people using Github:

https://i.stack.imgur.com/eCxXC.png

Go to your repo: Insights -> Network


Also, creating a Pull Request will also show the branch differences.
This only work for Public repos., what if I have a Private repo and the admin does not provide me all the access to response the question? For this current answer is not valid.
c
claudiu.f.marginean

I used some of the answers and found one that fit my case ( make sure all tasks are in the release branch).

Other methods works as well but I found that they might add lines that I do not need, like merge commits that add no value.

git fetch
git log origin/master..origin/release-1.1 --oneline --no-merges

or you can compare your current with master

git fetch
git log origin/master..HEAD --oneline --no-merges

git fetch is there to make sure you are using updated info.

In this way each commit will be on a line and you can copy/paste that into an text editor and start comparing the tasks with the commits that will be merged.


THIS!!! THANKS! Else I get "unknown revision or path not in the working tree."
M
Maroun

If you want to compare based on the commit messages, you can do the following:

git fetch
git log --oneline origin/master | cut -d' ' -f2- > master_log
git log --oneline origin/branch-X | cut -d' ' -f2- > branchx_log
diff <(sort master_log) <(sort branchx_log)

Instead of using --oneline and piping to cut you can use git log --format='%s'
K
Kim Briggs
#! /bin/bash
if ((2==$#)); then
  a=$1
  b=$2
  alog=$(echo $a | tr '/' '-').log
  blog=$(echo $b | tr '/' '-').log
  git log --oneline $a > $alog
  git log --oneline $b > $blog
  diff $alog $blog
fi

Contributing this because it allows a and b logs to be diff'ed visually, side by side, if you have a visual diff tool. Replace diff command at end with command to start visual diff tool.