Determine if Git working directory is clean from a script












56















I have a script which runs rsync with a Git working directory as destination. I want the script to have different behavior depending on if the working directory is clean (no changes to commit), or not. For instance, if the output of git status is as below, I want the script to exit:



git status
Already up-to-date.
# On branch master
nothing to commit (working directory clean)
Everything up-to-date


If the directory is not clean then I would like it to execute some more commands.



How can I check for output like the above in a shell script?










share|improve this question

























  • Would checking a status from last command help here? ($?)

    – UVV
    Sep 11 '14 at 13:27













  • Could you give more details please? What is the main idea for your script?

    – tachomi
    Sep 11 '14 at 13:29











  • @tachomi I added the context in the edit

    – brentwpeterson
    Sep 11 '14 at 13:53











  • you could just assume it's not clean and do a git reset --hard origin/branch if that is what you are going for... like if you are trying to cleanup after compiling something, etc.

    – SnakeDoc
    Sep 11 '14 at 16:42






  • 1





    @SnakeDoc You could, but I assume that the inverse case would be more common, i.e. exit if the working directory is dirty to avoid mangling local changes. Considering both case would make question more useful for future readers.

    – Thomas Nyman
    Sep 11 '14 at 16:54
















56















I have a script which runs rsync with a Git working directory as destination. I want the script to have different behavior depending on if the working directory is clean (no changes to commit), or not. For instance, if the output of git status is as below, I want the script to exit:



git status
Already up-to-date.
# On branch master
nothing to commit (working directory clean)
Everything up-to-date


If the directory is not clean then I would like it to execute some more commands.



How can I check for output like the above in a shell script?










share|improve this question

























  • Would checking a status from last command help here? ($?)

    – UVV
    Sep 11 '14 at 13:27













  • Could you give more details please? What is the main idea for your script?

    – tachomi
    Sep 11 '14 at 13:29











  • @tachomi I added the context in the edit

    – brentwpeterson
    Sep 11 '14 at 13:53











  • you could just assume it's not clean and do a git reset --hard origin/branch if that is what you are going for... like if you are trying to cleanup after compiling something, etc.

    – SnakeDoc
    Sep 11 '14 at 16:42






  • 1





    @SnakeDoc You could, but I assume that the inverse case would be more common, i.e. exit if the working directory is dirty to avoid mangling local changes. Considering both case would make question more useful for future readers.

    – Thomas Nyman
    Sep 11 '14 at 16:54














56












56








56


14






I have a script which runs rsync with a Git working directory as destination. I want the script to have different behavior depending on if the working directory is clean (no changes to commit), or not. For instance, if the output of git status is as below, I want the script to exit:



git status
Already up-to-date.
# On branch master
nothing to commit (working directory clean)
Everything up-to-date


If the directory is not clean then I would like it to execute some more commands.



How can I check for output like the above in a shell script?










share|improve this question
















I have a script which runs rsync with a Git working directory as destination. I want the script to have different behavior depending on if the working directory is clean (no changes to commit), or not. For instance, if the output of git status is as below, I want the script to exit:



git status
Already up-to-date.
# On branch master
nothing to commit (working directory clean)
Everything up-to-date


If the directory is not clean then I would like it to execute some more commands.



How can I check for output like the above in a shell script?







shell-script git






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Sep 11 '14 at 16:19









Thomas Nyman

20.6k85070




20.6k85070










asked Sep 11 '14 at 13:24









brentwpetersonbrentwpeterson

8532918




8532918













  • Would checking a status from last command help here? ($?)

    – UVV
    Sep 11 '14 at 13:27













  • Could you give more details please? What is the main idea for your script?

    – tachomi
    Sep 11 '14 at 13:29











  • @tachomi I added the context in the edit

    – brentwpeterson
    Sep 11 '14 at 13:53











  • you could just assume it's not clean and do a git reset --hard origin/branch if that is what you are going for... like if you are trying to cleanup after compiling something, etc.

    – SnakeDoc
    Sep 11 '14 at 16:42






  • 1





    @SnakeDoc You could, but I assume that the inverse case would be more common, i.e. exit if the working directory is dirty to avoid mangling local changes. Considering both case would make question more useful for future readers.

    – Thomas Nyman
    Sep 11 '14 at 16:54



















  • Would checking a status from last command help here? ($?)

    – UVV
    Sep 11 '14 at 13:27













  • Could you give more details please? What is the main idea for your script?

    – tachomi
    Sep 11 '14 at 13:29











  • @tachomi I added the context in the edit

    – brentwpeterson
    Sep 11 '14 at 13:53











  • you could just assume it's not clean and do a git reset --hard origin/branch if that is what you are going for... like if you are trying to cleanup after compiling something, etc.

    – SnakeDoc
    Sep 11 '14 at 16:42






  • 1





    @SnakeDoc You could, but I assume that the inverse case would be more common, i.e. exit if the working directory is dirty to avoid mangling local changes. Considering both case would make question more useful for future readers.

    – Thomas Nyman
    Sep 11 '14 at 16:54

















Would checking a status from last command help here? ($?)

– UVV
Sep 11 '14 at 13:27







Would checking a status from last command help here? ($?)

– UVV
Sep 11 '14 at 13:27















Could you give more details please? What is the main idea for your script?

– tachomi
Sep 11 '14 at 13:29





Could you give more details please? What is the main idea for your script?

– tachomi
Sep 11 '14 at 13:29













@tachomi I added the context in the edit

– brentwpeterson
Sep 11 '14 at 13:53





@tachomi I added the context in the edit

– brentwpeterson
Sep 11 '14 at 13:53













you could just assume it's not clean and do a git reset --hard origin/branch if that is what you are going for... like if you are trying to cleanup after compiling something, etc.

– SnakeDoc
Sep 11 '14 at 16:42





you could just assume it's not clean and do a git reset --hard origin/branch if that is what you are going for... like if you are trying to cleanup after compiling something, etc.

– SnakeDoc
Sep 11 '14 at 16:42




1




1





@SnakeDoc You could, but I assume that the inverse case would be more common, i.e. exit if the working directory is dirty to avoid mangling local changes. Considering both case would make question more useful for future readers.

– Thomas Nyman
Sep 11 '14 at 16:54





@SnakeDoc You could, but I assume that the inverse case would be more common, i.e. exit if the working directory is dirty to avoid mangling local changes. Considering both case would make question more useful for future readers.

– Thomas Nyman
Sep 11 '14 at 16:54










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















102














Parsing the output of git status is a bad idea because the output is intended to be human readable, not machine-readable. There's no guarantee that the output will remain the same in future versions of Git or in differently configured environments.



UVVs comment is on the right track, but unfortunately the return code of git status doesn't change when there are uncommitted changes. It does, however, provide the --porcelain option, which causes the output of git status --porcelain to be formatted in an easy-to-parse format for scripts, and will remain stable across Git versions and regardless of user configuration.



We can use empty output of git status --porcelain as an indicator that there are no changes to be committed:



if [ -z "$(git status --porcelain)" ]; then 
# Working directory clean
else
# Uncommitted changes
fi


If we do not care about untracked files in the working directory, we can use the --untracked-files=no option to disregard those:



if [ -z "$(git status --untracked-files=no --porcelain)" ]; then 
# Working directory clean excluding untracked files
else
# Uncommitted changes in tracked files
fi


To make this more robust against conditions which actually cause git status to fail without output to stdout, we can refine the check to:



if output=$(git status --porcelain) && [ -z "$output" ]; then
# Working directory clean
else
# Uncommitted changes
fi


It's also worth noting that, although git status does not give meaningful exit code when the working directory is unclean, git diff provides the --exit-code option, which makes it behave similar to the diff utility, that is, exiting with status 1 when there were differences and 0 when none were found.



Using this, we can check for unstaged changes with:



git diff --exit-code


and staged, but not committed changes with:



git diff --cached --exit-code


Although git diff can report on untracked files in submodules via appropriate arguments to --ignore-submodules, unfortunately it seems that there is no way to have it report on untracked files in the actual working directory. If untracked files in the working directory are relevant, git status --porcelain is probably the best bet.






share|improve this answer





















  • 2





    ughhh git status --porcelain will exit with code 0 even if there are changes not staged for commit and untracked files.

    – Alexander Mills
    Aug 31 '18 at 21:19











  • I was interested in determining ahead of time if git stash would do anything (it doesn't output a useful return code). I had to add --ignore-submodules as otherwise git status would indicate submodule changes which git stash ignores.

    – Devin Lane
    Oct 27 '18 at 21:03



















11














Use:



git diff-index --quiet HEAD


The return code reflects the state of the working directory (0 = clean, 1 = dirty). Untracked files are ignored.






share|improve this answer
























  • You should add link to post where did you get this!!

    – kyb
    Feb 14 '18 at 14:43






  • 6





    Returns 0 when there are untracked files in the current directory.

    – Adam Parkin
    Apr 12 '18 at 1:48






  • 1





    I don't think it's a return code, should be an exit code, I think there is a difference, return code is for bash functions, but maybe it's the same thing

    – Alexander Mills
    Aug 31 '18 at 21:20






  • 1





    If files had been touched/overwritten but are otherwise identical to the index, you need to first run git update-index --refresh before git diff-index HEAD. More info: stackoverflow.com/q/34807971/1407170

    – sffc
    Nov 1 '18 at 2:28











  • @AdamParkin I just add all files with git add . before issuing it. Usually it's the way to use it in a script

    – ceztko
    Dec 7 '18 at 13:27



















0














#!/bin/bash
echo "First arg: $1"

cd $1

bob="Already up-to-date."
echo $bob

echo $(git pull) > s.txt
cat s.txt
if [ "$(cat s.txt)" == "$bob" ]
then
echo "up"
else
echo "not up"
fi
rm -rf s.txt





share|improve this answer























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "106"
    };
    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: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    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
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f155046%2fdetermine-if-git-working-directory-is-clean-from-a-script%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    102














    Parsing the output of git status is a bad idea because the output is intended to be human readable, not machine-readable. There's no guarantee that the output will remain the same in future versions of Git or in differently configured environments.



    UVVs comment is on the right track, but unfortunately the return code of git status doesn't change when there are uncommitted changes. It does, however, provide the --porcelain option, which causes the output of git status --porcelain to be formatted in an easy-to-parse format for scripts, and will remain stable across Git versions and regardless of user configuration.



    We can use empty output of git status --porcelain as an indicator that there are no changes to be committed:



    if [ -z "$(git status --porcelain)" ]; then 
    # Working directory clean
    else
    # Uncommitted changes
    fi


    If we do not care about untracked files in the working directory, we can use the --untracked-files=no option to disregard those:



    if [ -z "$(git status --untracked-files=no --porcelain)" ]; then 
    # Working directory clean excluding untracked files
    else
    # Uncommitted changes in tracked files
    fi


    To make this more robust against conditions which actually cause git status to fail without output to stdout, we can refine the check to:



    if output=$(git status --porcelain) && [ -z "$output" ]; then
    # Working directory clean
    else
    # Uncommitted changes
    fi


    It's also worth noting that, although git status does not give meaningful exit code when the working directory is unclean, git diff provides the --exit-code option, which makes it behave similar to the diff utility, that is, exiting with status 1 when there were differences and 0 when none were found.



    Using this, we can check for unstaged changes with:



    git diff --exit-code


    and staged, but not committed changes with:



    git diff --cached --exit-code


    Although git diff can report on untracked files in submodules via appropriate arguments to --ignore-submodules, unfortunately it seems that there is no way to have it report on untracked files in the actual working directory. If untracked files in the working directory are relevant, git status --porcelain is probably the best bet.






    share|improve this answer





















    • 2





      ughhh git status --porcelain will exit with code 0 even if there are changes not staged for commit and untracked files.

      – Alexander Mills
      Aug 31 '18 at 21:19











    • I was interested in determining ahead of time if git stash would do anything (it doesn't output a useful return code). I had to add --ignore-submodules as otherwise git status would indicate submodule changes which git stash ignores.

      – Devin Lane
      Oct 27 '18 at 21:03
















    102














    Parsing the output of git status is a bad idea because the output is intended to be human readable, not machine-readable. There's no guarantee that the output will remain the same in future versions of Git or in differently configured environments.



    UVVs comment is on the right track, but unfortunately the return code of git status doesn't change when there are uncommitted changes. It does, however, provide the --porcelain option, which causes the output of git status --porcelain to be formatted in an easy-to-parse format for scripts, and will remain stable across Git versions and regardless of user configuration.



    We can use empty output of git status --porcelain as an indicator that there are no changes to be committed:



    if [ -z "$(git status --porcelain)" ]; then 
    # Working directory clean
    else
    # Uncommitted changes
    fi


    If we do not care about untracked files in the working directory, we can use the --untracked-files=no option to disregard those:



    if [ -z "$(git status --untracked-files=no --porcelain)" ]; then 
    # Working directory clean excluding untracked files
    else
    # Uncommitted changes in tracked files
    fi


    To make this more robust against conditions which actually cause git status to fail without output to stdout, we can refine the check to:



    if output=$(git status --porcelain) && [ -z "$output" ]; then
    # Working directory clean
    else
    # Uncommitted changes
    fi


    It's also worth noting that, although git status does not give meaningful exit code when the working directory is unclean, git diff provides the --exit-code option, which makes it behave similar to the diff utility, that is, exiting with status 1 when there were differences and 0 when none were found.



    Using this, we can check for unstaged changes with:



    git diff --exit-code


    and staged, but not committed changes with:



    git diff --cached --exit-code


    Although git diff can report on untracked files in submodules via appropriate arguments to --ignore-submodules, unfortunately it seems that there is no way to have it report on untracked files in the actual working directory. If untracked files in the working directory are relevant, git status --porcelain is probably the best bet.






    share|improve this answer





















    • 2





      ughhh git status --porcelain will exit with code 0 even if there are changes not staged for commit and untracked files.

      – Alexander Mills
      Aug 31 '18 at 21:19











    • I was interested in determining ahead of time if git stash would do anything (it doesn't output a useful return code). I had to add --ignore-submodules as otherwise git status would indicate submodule changes which git stash ignores.

      – Devin Lane
      Oct 27 '18 at 21:03














    102












    102








    102







    Parsing the output of git status is a bad idea because the output is intended to be human readable, not machine-readable. There's no guarantee that the output will remain the same in future versions of Git or in differently configured environments.



    UVVs comment is on the right track, but unfortunately the return code of git status doesn't change when there are uncommitted changes. It does, however, provide the --porcelain option, which causes the output of git status --porcelain to be formatted in an easy-to-parse format for scripts, and will remain stable across Git versions and regardless of user configuration.



    We can use empty output of git status --porcelain as an indicator that there are no changes to be committed:



    if [ -z "$(git status --porcelain)" ]; then 
    # Working directory clean
    else
    # Uncommitted changes
    fi


    If we do not care about untracked files in the working directory, we can use the --untracked-files=no option to disregard those:



    if [ -z "$(git status --untracked-files=no --porcelain)" ]; then 
    # Working directory clean excluding untracked files
    else
    # Uncommitted changes in tracked files
    fi


    To make this more robust against conditions which actually cause git status to fail without output to stdout, we can refine the check to:



    if output=$(git status --porcelain) && [ -z "$output" ]; then
    # Working directory clean
    else
    # Uncommitted changes
    fi


    It's also worth noting that, although git status does not give meaningful exit code when the working directory is unclean, git diff provides the --exit-code option, which makes it behave similar to the diff utility, that is, exiting with status 1 when there were differences and 0 when none were found.



    Using this, we can check for unstaged changes with:



    git diff --exit-code


    and staged, but not committed changes with:



    git diff --cached --exit-code


    Although git diff can report on untracked files in submodules via appropriate arguments to --ignore-submodules, unfortunately it seems that there is no way to have it report on untracked files in the actual working directory. If untracked files in the working directory are relevant, git status --porcelain is probably the best bet.






    share|improve this answer















    Parsing the output of git status is a bad idea because the output is intended to be human readable, not machine-readable. There's no guarantee that the output will remain the same in future versions of Git or in differently configured environments.



    UVVs comment is on the right track, but unfortunately the return code of git status doesn't change when there are uncommitted changes. It does, however, provide the --porcelain option, which causes the output of git status --porcelain to be formatted in an easy-to-parse format for scripts, and will remain stable across Git versions and regardless of user configuration.



    We can use empty output of git status --porcelain as an indicator that there are no changes to be committed:



    if [ -z "$(git status --porcelain)" ]; then 
    # Working directory clean
    else
    # Uncommitted changes
    fi


    If we do not care about untracked files in the working directory, we can use the --untracked-files=no option to disregard those:



    if [ -z "$(git status --untracked-files=no --porcelain)" ]; then 
    # Working directory clean excluding untracked files
    else
    # Uncommitted changes in tracked files
    fi


    To make this more robust against conditions which actually cause git status to fail without output to stdout, we can refine the check to:



    if output=$(git status --porcelain) && [ -z "$output" ]; then
    # Working directory clean
    else
    # Uncommitted changes
    fi


    It's also worth noting that, although git status does not give meaningful exit code when the working directory is unclean, git diff provides the --exit-code option, which makes it behave similar to the diff utility, that is, exiting with status 1 when there were differences and 0 when none were found.



    Using this, we can check for unstaged changes with:



    git diff --exit-code


    and staged, but not committed changes with:



    git diff --cached --exit-code


    Although git diff can report on untracked files in submodules via appropriate arguments to --ignore-submodules, unfortunately it seems that there is no way to have it report on untracked files in the actual working directory. If untracked files in the working directory are relevant, git status --porcelain is probably the best bet.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited Sep 11 '14 at 16:09

























    answered Sep 11 '14 at 15:48









    Thomas NymanThomas Nyman

    20.6k85070




    20.6k85070








    • 2





      ughhh git status --porcelain will exit with code 0 even if there are changes not staged for commit and untracked files.

      – Alexander Mills
      Aug 31 '18 at 21:19











    • I was interested in determining ahead of time if git stash would do anything (it doesn't output a useful return code). I had to add --ignore-submodules as otherwise git status would indicate submodule changes which git stash ignores.

      – Devin Lane
      Oct 27 '18 at 21:03














    • 2





      ughhh git status --porcelain will exit with code 0 even if there are changes not staged for commit and untracked files.

      – Alexander Mills
      Aug 31 '18 at 21:19











    • I was interested in determining ahead of time if git stash would do anything (it doesn't output a useful return code). I had to add --ignore-submodules as otherwise git status would indicate submodule changes which git stash ignores.

      – Devin Lane
      Oct 27 '18 at 21:03








    2




    2





    ughhh git status --porcelain will exit with code 0 even if there are changes not staged for commit and untracked files.

    – Alexander Mills
    Aug 31 '18 at 21:19





    ughhh git status --porcelain will exit with code 0 even if there are changes not staged for commit and untracked files.

    – Alexander Mills
    Aug 31 '18 at 21:19













    I was interested in determining ahead of time if git stash would do anything (it doesn't output a useful return code). I had to add --ignore-submodules as otherwise git status would indicate submodule changes which git stash ignores.

    – Devin Lane
    Oct 27 '18 at 21:03





    I was interested in determining ahead of time if git stash would do anything (it doesn't output a useful return code). I had to add --ignore-submodules as otherwise git status would indicate submodule changes which git stash ignores.

    – Devin Lane
    Oct 27 '18 at 21:03













    11














    Use:



    git diff-index --quiet HEAD


    The return code reflects the state of the working directory (0 = clean, 1 = dirty). Untracked files are ignored.






    share|improve this answer
























    • You should add link to post where did you get this!!

      – kyb
      Feb 14 '18 at 14:43






    • 6





      Returns 0 when there are untracked files in the current directory.

      – Adam Parkin
      Apr 12 '18 at 1:48






    • 1





      I don't think it's a return code, should be an exit code, I think there is a difference, return code is for bash functions, but maybe it's the same thing

      – Alexander Mills
      Aug 31 '18 at 21:20






    • 1





      If files had been touched/overwritten but are otherwise identical to the index, you need to first run git update-index --refresh before git diff-index HEAD. More info: stackoverflow.com/q/34807971/1407170

      – sffc
      Nov 1 '18 at 2:28











    • @AdamParkin I just add all files with git add . before issuing it. Usually it's the way to use it in a script

      – ceztko
      Dec 7 '18 at 13:27
















    11














    Use:



    git diff-index --quiet HEAD


    The return code reflects the state of the working directory (0 = clean, 1 = dirty). Untracked files are ignored.






    share|improve this answer
























    • You should add link to post where did you get this!!

      – kyb
      Feb 14 '18 at 14:43






    • 6





      Returns 0 when there are untracked files in the current directory.

      – Adam Parkin
      Apr 12 '18 at 1:48






    • 1





      I don't think it's a return code, should be an exit code, I think there is a difference, return code is for bash functions, but maybe it's the same thing

      – Alexander Mills
      Aug 31 '18 at 21:20






    • 1





      If files had been touched/overwritten but are otherwise identical to the index, you need to first run git update-index --refresh before git diff-index HEAD. More info: stackoverflow.com/q/34807971/1407170

      – sffc
      Nov 1 '18 at 2:28











    • @AdamParkin I just add all files with git add . before issuing it. Usually it's the way to use it in a script

      – ceztko
      Dec 7 '18 at 13:27














    11












    11








    11







    Use:



    git diff-index --quiet HEAD


    The return code reflects the state of the working directory (0 = clean, 1 = dirty). Untracked files are ignored.






    share|improve this answer













    Use:



    git diff-index --quiet HEAD


    The return code reflects the state of the working directory (0 = clean, 1 = dirty). Untracked files are ignored.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered Sep 27 '17 at 5:41









    André van HerkAndré van Herk

    11912




    11912













    • You should add link to post where did you get this!!

      – kyb
      Feb 14 '18 at 14:43






    • 6





      Returns 0 when there are untracked files in the current directory.

      – Adam Parkin
      Apr 12 '18 at 1:48






    • 1





      I don't think it's a return code, should be an exit code, I think there is a difference, return code is for bash functions, but maybe it's the same thing

      – Alexander Mills
      Aug 31 '18 at 21:20






    • 1





      If files had been touched/overwritten but are otherwise identical to the index, you need to first run git update-index --refresh before git diff-index HEAD. More info: stackoverflow.com/q/34807971/1407170

      – sffc
      Nov 1 '18 at 2:28











    • @AdamParkin I just add all files with git add . before issuing it. Usually it's the way to use it in a script

      – ceztko
      Dec 7 '18 at 13:27



















    • You should add link to post where did you get this!!

      – kyb
      Feb 14 '18 at 14:43






    • 6





      Returns 0 when there are untracked files in the current directory.

      – Adam Parkin
      Apr 12 '18 at 1:48






    • 1





      I don't think it's a return code, should be an exit code, I think there is a difference, return code is for bash functions, but maybe it's the same thing

      – Alexander Mills
      Aug 31 '18 at 21:20






    • 1





      If files had been touched/overwritten but are otherwise identical to the index, you need to first run git update-index --refresh before git diff-index HEAD. More info: stackoverflow.com/q/34807971/1407170

      – sffc
      Nov 1 '18 at 2:28











    • @AdamParkin I just add all files with git add . before issuing it. Usually it's the way to use it in a script

      – ceztko
      Dec 7 '18 at 13:27

















    You should add link to post where did you get this!!

    – kyb
    Feb 14 '18 at 14:43





    You should add link to post where did you get this!!

    – kyb
    Feb 14 '18 at 14:43




    6




    6





    Returns 0 when there are untracked files in the current directory.

    – Adam Parkin
    Apr 12 '18 at 1:48





    Returns 0 when there are untracked files in the current directory.

    – Adam Parkin
    Apr 12 '18 at 1:48




    1




    1





    I don't think it's a return code, should be an exit code, I think there is a difference, return code is for bash functions, but maybe it's the same thing

    – Alexander Mills
    Aug 31 '18 at 21:20





    I don't think it's a return code, should be an exit code, I think there is a difference, return code is for bash functions, but maybe it's the same thing

    – Alexander Mills
    Aug 31 '18 at 21:20




    1




    1





    If files had been touched/overwritten but are otherwise identical to the index, you need to first run git update-index --refresh before git diff-index HEAD. More info: stackoverflow.com/q/34807971/1407170

    – sffc
    Nov 1 '18 at 2:28





    If files had been touched/overwritten but are otherwise identical to the index, you need to first run git update-index --refresh before git diff-index HEAD. More info: stackoverflow.com/q/34807971/1407170

    – sffc
    Nov 1 '18 at 2:28













    @AdamParkin I just add all files with git add . before issuing it. Usually it's the way to use it in a script

    – ceztko
    Dec 7 '18 at 13:27





    @AdamParkin I just add all files with git add . before issuing it. Usually it's the way to use it in a script

    – ceztko
    Dec 7 '18 at 13:27











    0














    #!/bin/bash
    echo "First arg: $1"

    cd $1

    bob="Already up-to-date."
    echo $bob

    echo $(git pull) > s.txt
    cat s.txt
    if [ "$(cat s.txt)" == "$bob" ]
    then
    echo "up"
    else
    echo "not up"
    fi
    rm -rf s.txt





    share|improve this answer




























      0














      #!/bin/bash
      echo "First arg: $1"

      cd $1

      bob="Already up-to-date."
      echo $bob

      echo $(git pull) > s.txt
      cat s.txt
      if [ "$(cat s.txt)" == "$bob" ]
      then
      echo "up"
      else
      echo "not up"
      fi
      rm -rf s.txt





      share|improve this answer


























        0












        0








        0







        #!/bin/bash
        echo "First arg: $1"

        cd $1

        bob="Already up-to-date."
        echo $bob

        echo $(git pull) > s.txt
        cat s.txt
        if [ "$(cat s.txt)" == "$bob" ]
        then
        echo "up"
        else
        echo "not up"
        fi
        rm -rf s.txt





        share|improve this answer













        #!/bin/bash
        echo "First arg: $1"

        cd $1

        bob="Already up-to-date."
        echo $bob

        echo $(git pull) > s.txt
        cat s.txt
        if [ "$(cat s.txt)" == "$bob" ]
        then
        echo "up"
        else
        echo "not up"
        fi
        rm -rf s.txt






        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered Feb 20 at 12:07









        Robert ARobert A

        1




        1






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


            • 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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f155046%2fdetermine-if-git-working-directory-is-clean-from-a-script%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            How to reconfigure Docker Trusted Registry 2.x.x to use CEPH FS mount instead of NFS and other traditional...

            is 'sed' thread safe

            How to make a Squid Proxy server?