Oh thank you, I didn’t know that / didn’t grasp that while reading (apparently too fast) your previous mails. That is way nicer. Thank you. Claus > On 25.09.2022, at 02:59, Đoàn Trần Công Danh <congdanhqx@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 2022-09-25 01:46:13+0200, Claus Fischer <claus.fischer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Well since I usually don’t have many revisions backwards, typically >> no more than 50, I can just traverse the tree backwards from main. >> I remember the last ‘bad’ revision before the good one. >> So there’s a solution for me. >> >> Yes the bisect command puts the correct ‘first bad’ revision in its >> output but it’s surrounded by a large amount of useless text. It >> would be nice to have a ‘quiet’ flag that lets it output just the >> bad revision. Alternatively, that it ends by checking out just that >> bad revision before revert. >> >> My problem is solved by stepping backwards to HEAD~1 each time, but >> you might consider making bisect more scriptable. > > No, you don't need to parse "git bisect" output to get the "first bad" > revision. The "first bad" revision is stored in refs/bisect/bad. > > And you can take the "first bad" revision in a scriptable way with: > > FIRST_BAD=$(git rev-parse --verify refs/bisect/bad) > > Of course, after finishing bisecting. > > -- > Danh
