Test old commit in Git Repository
I currently have a Project(JavaScript) with a bug in it and I am sure that I fixed it sometime ago, now my Question is how to revert to an old commit and check that Version on my localhost.
But I do not want to loose any changes in my git repo I just want to check how the Project look at commit X, how do I manage that.
I am using gitkraken as a gui.
git git-revert gitkraken
asked Nov 14 '18 at 12:24
Jon not doe xxJon not doe xx
737
add a comment |
I currently have a Project(JavaScript) with a bug in it and I am sure that I fixed it sometime ago, now my Question is how to revert to an old commit and check that Version on my localhost.
But I do not want to loose any changes in my git repo I just want to check how the Project look at commit X, how do I manage that.
I am using gitkraken as a gui.
git git-revert gitkraken
asked Nov 14 '18 at 12:24
Jon not doe xxJon not doe xx
737
add a comment |
I currently have a Project(JavaScript) with a bug in it and I am sure that I fixed it sometime ago, now my Question is how to revert to an old commit and check that Version on my localhost.
But I do not want to loose any changes in my git repo I just want to check how the Project look at commit X, how do I manage that.
I am using gitkraken as a gui.
git git-revert gitkraken
asked Nov 14 '18 at 12:24
Jon not doe xxJon not doe xx
737
I currently have a Project(JavaScript) with a bug in it and I am sure that I fixed it sometime ago, now my Question is how to revert to an old commit and check that Version on my localhost.
But I do not want to loose any changes in my git repo I just want to check how the Project look at commit X, how do I manage that.
I am using gitkraken as a gui.
git git-revert gitkraken
git git-revert gitkraken
asked Nov 14 '18 at 12:24
Jon not doe xxJon not doe xx
737
asked Nov 14 '18 at 12:24
Jon not doe xxJon not doe xx
737
asked Nov 14 '18 at 12:24
Jon not doe xxJon not doe xx
737
asked Nov 14 '18 at 12:24
Jon not doe xxJon not doe xx
737
asked Nov 14 '18 at 12:24
Jon not doe xxJon not doe xx
737
737
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
- Be sure you have no uncommited changes; commit or stash them if necessary
- Create a new branch at your current HEAD (using the
Branchbutton) - Search the commit you want to take a look at
- Right click the commit, choose
Reset <branchname> to this commit>Hard - discard all changes. This will reset the branch you just created to this commit. - You travelled back in time. Test and check everything you need to. If you want to go back to the present, just check out your original branch.
EDIT:
There's an even easier way!
- Be sure you have no uncommited changes; commit or stash them if necessary
- Search the commit you want to take a look at
- Right click the commit, choose
Create branch here. Enter a branch name. This will create a branch at this commit. - Check out the newly created branch by double-clicking.
- You travelled back in time. Test and check everything you need to. If you want to go back to the present, just check out your original branch.
answered Nov 14 '18 at 12:38
kowskykowsky
3,2961324
A goodgitkrakenanswer! I see gitkraken doesn't justcheckoutto a commit.
– clmno
Nov 14 '18 at 12:41
This worked thanks alot, is this a good "practice" for issues like this?
– Jon not doe xx
Nov 14 '18 at 13:43
Yes. It's very cheap to create branches in git, so it's completely legit to create some to move around in your repository's history. It's generally advisable to create backup branches before you perform potentially destructive operations like rebases or hard resets. Having that said, it's by no means necessary to create branches for this purpose; when you use git via command line, you can usegit checkout <commit-id>to checkout commits directly; although this will lead to a detached HEAD state. In gitkraken, however, you will always need to work with branches.
– kowsky
Nov 14 '18 at 13:54
add a comment |
If you are unsure when the bug was introduced/fiex you can use the bisect approach of git: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-bisect
git bisect start
git bisect bad COMMIT_KNOWN_TO_FAIL
git bisect good COMMIT_KNOWN_TO_PASS
Then git will select a commit in the middle. You can do your check and depending on the result of your test you call:
git bisect good
if the test passes and
git bisect bad
if the test fails.
Then git selects another commit towards the former good if the test failed and towards the **bad* if the test passed.
Since you're looking for when the problem disappeard you might have to switch the meaning of "good" and "bad" when continuing...
when you identified the malicios commit call
git bisect reset
answered Nov 14 '18 at 21:02
Timothy TruckleTimothy Truckle
8,42621834
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53300194%2ftest-old-commit-in-git-repository%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
- Be sure you have no uncommited changes; commit or stash them if necessary
- Create a new branch at your current HEAD (using the
Branchbutton) - Search the commit you want to take a look at
- Right click the commit, choose
Reset <branchname> to this commit>Hard - discard all changes. This will reset the branch you just created to this commit. - You travelled back in time. Test and check everything you need to. If you want to go back to the present, just check out your original branch.
EDIT:
There's an even easier way!
- Be sure you have no uncommited changes; commit or stash them if necessary
- Search the commit you want to take a look at
- Right click the commit, choose
Create branch here. Enter a branch name. This will create a branch at this commit. - Check out the newly created branch by double-clicking.
- You travelled back in time. Test and check everything you need to. If you want to go back to the present, just check out your original branch.
answered Nov 14 '18 at 12:38
kowskykowsky
3,2961324
A goodgitkrakenanswer! I see gitkraken doesn't justcheckoutto a commit.
– clmno
Nov 14 '18 at 12:41
This worked thanks alot, is this a good "practice" for issues like this?
– Jon not doe xx
Nov 14 '18 at 13:43
Yes. It's very cheap to create branches in git, so it's completely legit to create some to move around in your repository's history. It's generally advisable to create backup branches before you perform potentially destructive operations like rebases or hard resets. Having that said, it's by no means necessary to create branches for this purpose; when you use git via command line, you can usegit checkout <commit-id>to checkout commits directly; although this will lead to a detached HEAD state. In gitkraken, however, you will always need to work with branches.
– kowsky
Nov 14 '18 at 13:54
add a comment |
- Be sure you have no uncommited changes; commit or stash them if necessary
- Create a new branch at your current HEAD (using the
Branchbutton) - Search the commit you want to take a look at
- Right click the commit, choose
Reset <branchname> to this commit>Hard - discard all changes. This will reset the branch you just created to this commit. - You travelled back in time. Test and check everything you need to. If you want to go back to the present, just check out your original branch.
EDIT:
There's an even easier way!
- Be sure you have no uncommited changes; commit or stash them if necessary
- Search the commit you want to take a look at
- Right click the commit, choose
Create branch here. Enter a branch name. This will create a branch at this commit. - Check out the newly created branch by double-clicking.
- You travelled back in time. Test and check everything you need to. If you want to go back to the present, just check out your original branch.
answered Nov 14 '18 at 12:38
kowskykowsky
3,2961324
A goodgitkrakenanswer! I see gitkraken doesn't justcheckoutto a commit.
– clmno
Nov 14 '18 at 12:41
This worked thanks alot, is this a good "practice" for issues like this?
– Jon not doe xx
Nov 14 '18 at 13:43
Yes. It's very cheap to create branches in git, so it's completely legit to create some to move around in your repository's history. It's generally advisable to create backup branches before you perform potentially destructive operations like rebases or hard resets. Having that said, it's by no means necessary to create branches for this purpose; when you use git via command line, you can usegit checkout <commit-id>to checkout commits directly; although this will lead to a detached HEAD state. In gitkraken, however, you will always need to work with branches.
– kowsky
Nov 14 '18 at 13:54
add a comment |
- Be sure you have no uncommited changes; commit or stash them if necessary
- Create a new branch at your current HEAD (using the
Branchbutton) - Search the commit you want to take a look at
- Right click the commit, choose
Reset <branchname> to this commit>Hard - discard all changes. This will reset the branch you just created to this commit. - You travelled back in time. Test and check everything you need to. If you want to go back to the present, just check out your original branch.
EDIT:
There's an even easier way!
- Be sure you have no uncommited changes; commit or stash them if necessary
- Search the commit you want to take a look at
- Right click the commit, choose
Create branch here. Enter a branch name. This will create a branch at this commit. - Check out the newly created branch by double-clicking.
- You travelled back in time. Test and check everything you need to. If you want to go back to the present, just check out your original branch.
answered Nov 14 '18 at 12:38
kowskykowsky
3,2961324
- Be sure you have no uncommited changes; commit or stash them if necessary
- Create a new branch at your current HEAD (using the
Branchbutton) - Search the commit you want to take a look at
- Right click the commit, choose
Reset <branchname> to this commit>Hard - discard all changes. This will reset the branch you just created to this commit. - You travelled back in time. Test and check everything you need to. If you want to go back to the present, just check out your original branch.
EDIT:
There's an even easier way!
- Be sure you have no uncommited changes; commit or stash them if necessary
- Search the commit you want to take a look at
- Right click the commit, choose
Create branch here. Enter a branch name. This will create a branch at this commit. - Check out the newly created branch by double-clicking.
- You travelled back in time. Test and check everything you need to. If you want to go back to the present, just check out your original branch.
answered Nov 14 '18 at 12:38
kowskykowsky
3,2961324
edited Nov 14 '18 at 12:44
answered Nov 14 '18 at 12:38
kowskykowsky
3,2961324
answered Nov 14 '18 at 12:38
kowskykowsky
3,2961324
answered Nov 14 '18 at 12:38
kowskykowsky
3,2961324
3,2961324
A goodgitkrakenanswer! I see gitkraken doesn't justcheckoutto a commit.
– clmno
Nov 14 '18 at 12:41
This worked thanks alot, is this a good "practice" for issues like this?
– Jon not doe xx
Nov 14 '18 at 13:43
Yes. It's very cheap to create branches in git, so it's completely legit to create some to move around in your repository's history. It's generally advisable to create backup branches before you perform potentially destructive operations like rebases or hard resets. Having that said, it's by no means necessary to create branches for this purpose; when you use git via command line, you can usegit checkout <commit-id>to checkout commits directly; although this will lead to a detached HEAD state. In gitkraken, however, you will always need to work with branches.
– kowsky
Nov 14 '18 at 13:54
add a comment |
A goodgitkrakenanswer! I see gitkraken doesn't justcheckoutto a commit.
– clmno
Nov 14 '18 at 12:41
This worked thanks alot, is this a good "practice" for issues like this?
– Jon not doe xx
Nov 14 '18 at 13:43
Yes. It's very cheap to create branches in git, so it's completely legit to create some to move around in your repository's history. It's generally advisable to create backup branches before you perform potentially destructive operations like rebases or hard resets. Having that said, it's by no means necessary to create branches for this purpose; when you use git via command line, you can usegit checkout <commit-id>to checkout commits directly; although this will lead to a detached HEAD state. In gitkraken, however, you will always need to work with branches.
– kowsky
Nov 14 '18 at 13:54
A good
gitkraken answer! I see gitkraken doesn't just checkout to a commit.– clmno
Nov 14 '18 at 12:41
A good
gitkraken answer! I see gitkraken doesn't just checkout to a commit.– clmno
Nov 14 '18 at 12:41
This worked thanks alot, is this a good "practice" for issues like this?
– Jon not doe xx
Nov 14 '18 at 13:43
This worked thanks alot, is this a good "practice" for issues like this?
– Jon not doe xx
Nov 14 '18 at 13:43
Yes. It's very cheap to create branches in git, so it's completely legit to create some to move around in your repository's history. It's generally advisable to create backup branches before you perform potentially destructive operations like rebases or hard resets. Having that said, it's by no means necessary to create branches for this purpose; when you use git via command line, you can use
git checkout <commit-id> to checkout commits directly; although this will lead to a detached HEAD state. In gitkraken, however, you will always need to work with branches.– kowsky
Nov 14 '18 at 13:54
Yes. It's very cheap to create branches in git, so it's completely legit to create some to move around in your repository's history. It's generally advisable to create backup branches before you perform potentially destructive operations like rebases or hard resets. Having that said, it's by no means necessary to create branches for this purpose; when you use git via command line, you can use
git checkout <commit-id> to checkout commits directly; although this will lead to a detached HEAD state. In gitkraken, however, you will always need to work with branches.– kowsky
Nov 14 '18 at 13:54
add a comment |
If you are unsure when the bug was introduced/fiex you can use the bisect approach of git: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-bisect
git bisect start
git bisect bad COMMIT_KNOWN_TO_FAIL
git bisect good COMMIT_KNOWN_TO_PASS
Then git will select a commit in the middle. You can do your check and depending on the result of your test you call:
git bisect good
if the test passes and
git bisect bad
if the test fails.
Then git selects another commit towards the former good if the test failed and towards the **bad* if the test passed.
Since you're looking for when the problem disappeard you might have to switch the meaning of "good" and "bad" when continuing...
when you identified the malicios commit call
git bisect reset
answered Nov 14 '18 at 21:02
Timothy TruckleTimothy Truckle
8,42621834
add a comment |
If you are unsure when the bug was introduced/fiex you can use the bisect approach of git: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-bisect
git bisect start
git bisect bad COMMIT_KNOWN_TO_FAIL
git bisect good COMMIT_KNOWN_TO_PASS
Then git will select a commit in the middle. You can do your check and depending on the result of your test you call:
git bisect good
if the test passes and
git bisect bad
if the test fails.
Then git selects another commit towards the former good if the test failed and towards the **bad* if the test passed.
Since you're looking for when the problem disappeard you might have to switch the meaning of "good" and "bad" when continuing...
when you identified the malicios commit call
git bisect reset
answered Nov 14 '18 at 21:02
Timothy TruckleTimothy Truckle
8,42621834
add a comment |
If you are unsure when the bug was introduced/fiex you can use the bisect approach of git: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-bisect
git bisect start
git bisect bad COMMIT_KNOWN_TO_FAIL
git bisect good COMMIT_KNOWN_TO_PASS
Then git will select a commit in the middle. You can do your check and depending on the result of your test you call:
git bisect good
if the test passes and
git bisect bad
if the test fails.
Then git selects another commit towards the former good if the test failed and towards the **bad* if the test passed.
Since you're looking for when the problem disappeard you might have to switch the meaning of "good" and "bad" when continuing...
when you identified the malicios commit call
git bisect reset
answered Nov 14 '18 at 21:02
Timothy TruckleTimothy Truckle
8,42621834
If you are unsure when the bug was introduced/fiex you can use the bisect approach of git: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-bisect
git bisect start
git bisect bad COMMIT_KNOWN_TO_FAIL
git bisect good COMMIT_KNOWN_TO_PASS
Then git will select a commit in the middle. You can do your check and depending on the result of your test you call:
git bisect good
if the test passes and
git bisect bad
if the test fails.
Then git selects another commit towards the former good if the test failed and towards the **bad* if the test passed.
Since you're looking for when the problem disappeard you might have to switch the meaning of "good" and "bad" when continuing...
when you identified the malicios commit call
git bisect reset
answered Nov 14 '18 at 21:02
Timothy TruckleTimothy Truckle
8,42621834
answered Nov 14 '18 at 21:02
Timothy TruckleTimothy Truckle
8,42621834
answered Nov 14 '18 at 21:02
Timothy TruckleTimothy Truckle
8,42621834
answered Nov 14 '18 at 21:02
Timothy TruckleTimothy Truckle
8,42621834
8,42621834
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53300194%2ftest-old-commit-in-git-repository%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
