Oops, it's just my mistake. git-remote also does not have '--all' option. 2012/5/12 Yi, EungJun <semtlenori@xxxxxxxxx>: > Wow, I should do like this: > > $ git branch -a --contains 499e7b31509cfbb59dcb2a046f8e2fd1a3e73d6f > * master > remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master > remotes/origin/master > remotes/origin/next > remotes/origin/pu > > git-branch has '-a' but not '-all', and git-remote has '--all' but not '-a'. > > This is a bit confusing for me. Why don't the two commands have the > option under the same name? > > > 2012/5/12 Carlos Martín Nieto <cmn@xxxxxxxx>: >> On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 20:42 +0900, Yi, EungJun wrote: >>> Is there any way to find remote and local branches include given commit? >>> >>> e.g. >>> >>> $ git branch --all --contains 499e7b31509cfbb59dcb2a046f8e2fd1a3e73d6f >>> * master >>> remotes/origin/next >>> >>> As you know, it does not work and "git branch --contains" finds only >>> local branches. >> >> Works For Me. What version are you trying it with? Are you sure that >> remote-tracking branches do contain that commit? >> >> From a quick look through the log and release notes, it was never >> mentioned as a fix. The log contains 3f7701a4 from 2007 which fixes 'git >> describe --all --contains' which, though unlikely, might be related. >> This commit was however part of release 1.5.4, which makes it unlikely >> you'd be using something older. >> >> cmn >> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html