Re: git trees which are not yet in linux-next

[Stephen Rothwell]

On Sat, 03 May 2008 10:46:39 +0200 Stefan Richter <stefanr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Of course some committers have more than one tree in -next.  So if 
> Andrew wants to know the actual tree, the laziest method which I know of is
> $ gitk <commit_id>
> 
> Among else, gitk shows which branches contain the commit.  (How to do 
> this without X GUI?)

Unfortunately, this will not work either as I do not export to the public
tree the heads of each of the branches that I merge.  It does work in my
tree until I do the next update.

However, if you look at the closest following merge that is committed by
me, that will tell you which branch the commit was on.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature