On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 09:42:41PM -0800, G. Sylvie Davies wrote: > Aside from the usual "git log -cc", I think this should work (replace > HEAD with whichever commit you are analyzing): > > git diff --name-only HEAD^2...HEAD^1 > m1 > git diff --name-only HEAD^1...HEAD^2 > b1 > git diff --name-only HEAD^1..HEAD > m2 > git diff --name-only HEAD^2..HEAD > b2 > > If files listed between m1 and b2 differ, then the merge is dirty. > Similarly for m2 and b1. > > More information here: > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/27683077/how-do-you-detect-an-evil-merge-in-git/41356308#41356308
I don't think that can reliably find evil merges, since it looks at the file level. If you had one hunk resolved for "theirs" and one hunk for "ours" in a given file, then the file will be listed in each diff, whether it has evil hunks or not. I don't think this is just about evil merges, though. For instance, try: seq 1 10 >file git add file git commit -m base sed s/4/master/ <file >tmp && mv tmp file git commit -am master git checkout -b other HEAD^ sed s/4/other/ <file >tmp && mv tmp file git commit -am other git merge master git checkout --ours file git commit -am merged merge=$(git rev-parse HEAD) The question is: were there conflicts in $merge, and how were they resolved? That isn't an evil merge, but there's still something interesting to show that "git log --cc" won't display. Replaying the merge like: git checkout $merge^1 git merge $merge^2 git diff -R $merge shows you the patch to go from the conflict state to the final one. -Peff
