Matthieu Moy <> writes:

> Ramkumar Ramachandra <> writes:
>>  was checking it out: a 'git log <pathspec>', when referring to a file
>>  inside the subtree, doesn't work as expected: it only displays the
>>  HEAD commit.
> This is somehow expected: the subtree merge changed the filename during
> merge (it is subtree/file.txt after the merge, and just file.txt
> before), so "git log" without --follow just considers the file appeared.
> OTOH, I think this is a known limitation of "git log --follow" that it
> does not follow renames done by subtree merges.

Umm, it should follow the rename.  The big limitation is that it is
unable to follow more than one name at a time, so if the file exists on
both sides of the subtree merge, it will follow the original name.  And
that's the common case; only the very first merge of the subtree has the
files only on one side.

You can see this by comparing

  git log --oneline --follow gitk-git/gitk


  git log --oneline -- gitk gitk-git/gitk

Thomas Rast
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to