How do I list all remote branches in Git 1.7+?

Question

I've tried git branch -r, but that only lists remote branches that I've tracked locally. How do I find the list of those that I haven't? (It doesn't matter to me whether the command lists all remote branches or only those that are untracked.)

You mean you've modified the default refspec, so that `git fetch` and `git remote update` don't fetch all the remote's branches? Because otherwise you could just fetch then use `git branch -r`... — Cascabel, Aug 12 '10 at 23:40
I must have. `git branch -r` was only showing me remote branches that I had tracked locally. It's working better now. — James A. Rosen, Aug 13 '10 at 00:02

score 1119 · Accepted Answer · edited Jun 22 '18 at 11:40

1119

For the vast majority^[1] of visitors here, the correct and simplest answer to the question "How do I list all remote branches in Git 1.7+?" is:

git branch -r

For a small minority^[1] git branch -r does not work. If git branch -r does not work try:

git ls-remote --heads <remote-name>

If git branch -r does not work, then maybe as Cascabel says "you've modified the default refspec, so that git fetch and git remote update don't fetch all the remote's branches".

^[1] As of the writing of this footnote 2018-Feb, I looked at the comments and see that the git branch -r works for the vast majority (about 90% or 125 out of 140).

If git branch -r does not work, check git config --get remote.origin.fetch contains a wildcard (*) as per this answer

edited Jun 22 '18 at 11:40

Andy

17,423
9
52
69

answered Aug 12 '10 at 21:44

Dustin

89,080
21
111
133

27

You can also do `git ls-remote [url]` so you don't have to clone it first :) – Zsub Oct 14 '13 at 15:33
29

@Stephan: are you sure about this? `git branch -r`also did not work for me. It's just listing the branches already tracked locally. But `git ls-remote --heads` listed all branches available on the remote repository ... – rexford Oct 17 '14 at 08:58
@Stephan: looks like you're right, anyway. The comment by nielsbot below resolved this issue for me: _seems this doesn't list all remote branches if I clone from an existing pulled repo and then manually point origin at the git server._ – rexford Oct 17 '14 at 09:05
Looks like if your remote is *origin* you can skip referencing it, as it's the default. – alex Feb 02 '16 at 08:56
2

If one wants to fetch from the branches listed via `git ls-remote` (and not listed at `git branch -r`), one has to execute `git config remote.origin.fetch "+refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*"` before fetching as described at http://stackoverflow.com/a/26649770/873282. – koppor Feb 14 '16 at 13:02
Option -r causes the remote-tracking branches to be listed, and option -a shows both local and remote branches. – sandalone Oct 23 '17 at 12:22
17

Don't forget to do `git fetch --all` before to get all the current remote branches. – A. Attia May 04 '18 at 12:22
4

The first part of this answer is wrong. Out of the box without modifying refspec anywhere, `git branch -r` simply does not list all remote branches in all cases. Moreover, because it cannot reliably get all branches, it really shouldn't be trusted in the other "90%" cases either. – Matthew Jun 19 '18 at 14:24
4

probably a good idea to mention that `git fetch` should be run first right? – Alexander Mills Aug 05 '18 at 16:53
@rexford made a valid point. `git branch -r` tells you at what remote branches your (or just fetched) local branches point at. it does not tell you if they actually exist or not at origin. Yes, it's a common case that it HAPPENS to be the correct list, but not always (for 5 years at 2 jobs I never hit a mismatch). `git ls-remote --heads` actually lists only existing remote branches. – SwissNavy Jul 23 '20 at 14:02

score 218 · Answer 2 · edited Oct 23 '19 at 11:52

218

remote show shows all the branches on the remote, including those that are not tracked locally and even those that have not yet been fetched.

git remote show <remote-name>

It also tries to show the status of the branches relative to your local repository:

> git remote show origin
* remote origin
  Fetch URL: C:/git/.\remote_repo.git
  Push  URL: C:/git/.\remote_repo.git
  HEAD branch: master
  Remote branches:
    branch_that_is_not_even_fetched new (next fetch will store in remotes/origin)
    branch_that_is_not_tracked      tracked
    branch_that_is_tracked          tracked
    master                          tracked
  Local branches configured for 'git pull':
    branch_that_is_tracked merges with remote branch_that_is_tracked
    master                 merges with remote master
  Local refs configured for 'git push':
    branch_that_is_tracked pushes to branch_that_is_tracked (fast-forwardable)
    master                 pushes to master                 (up to date)

edited Oct 23 '19 at 11:52

Peter Mortensen

30,738
21
105
131

answered Mar 26 '13 at 06:12

Klas Mellbourn

42,571
24
140
158

1

Exactly. Not fetched, not tracked locally. – Thufir Feb 15 '15 at 11:32
3

`branch_that_is_not_tracked tracked` ? – Piotr Dobrogost Oct 11 '15 at 15:48
3

@PiotrDobrogost Yes! `branch_that_is_not_tracked` is a branch that is not tracked by any local git branch. However, it has been fetched to the local repository (so there is a remote branch). For some strange reason `git remote show` calls this state `tracked`, even though there is no local branch that tracks the remote. In this case, the opposite of `tracked` is `new`, meaning "not fetched". – Klas Mellbourn Oct 11 '15 at 19:17
this doesnt work programmatically, too difficult to parse – Alexander Mills Aug 05 '18 at 16:53
1

This caught a special case I had where I had pulled a remote branch locally which had then been removed on the remote. Then `git branch -r` suggests that there is a remote branch still, but `git remote show origin` shows that `refs/remotes/origin/my-now-dead-branch stale (use 'git remote prune' to remove)`. Much more useful! – icc97 Oct 19 '18 at 09:16
it works good, but impossible to parse in bash to get just branches list – Oleg Abrazhaev Jun 23 '21 at 16:17
`git remote show origin` shows stale branches, i.e., branches that do not exist on remote anymore. Doing `git remote prune origin` deletes the stale branches, and then the output matches what `git branch -r` shows. – Yatharth Agarwal May 08 '23 at 15:01
Also, I had to run `git remote update origin` for unclear reasons, before git actually properly pulled all remote branches. See https://stackoverflow.com/a/11624159/1292652 – Yatharth Agarwal May 08 '23 at 15:08

Nick Gronow · Answer 3 · 2017-02-16T14:00:50.040

64

Using git branch -r lists all remote branches and git branch -a lists all branches on local and remote. These lists get outdated though. To keep these lists up-to-date, run

git remote update --prune

which will update your local branch list with all new ones from the remote and remove any that are no longer there. Running this update command without the --prune will retrieve new branches but not delete ones no longer on the remote.

You can speed up this update by specifying a remote, otherwise it will pull updates from all remotes you have added, like so

git remote update --prune origin

edited Feb 16 '17 at 14:00

answered Apr 28 '14 at 18:34

Nick Gronow

1,597
14
14

2

This fixed my problem - 'git branch -r' now works for me. – Francis Norton May 04 '18 at 14:21
Note to self: `git remote update --prune` is equal to `git fetch --all --prune` – M Imam Pratama Jan 23 '22 at 00:39

score 57 · Answer 4 · answered Aug 12 '10 at 20:48

57

git branch -a | grep remotes/*

answered Aug 12 '10 at 20:48

Idan K

20,443
10
63
83

11

This is basically equivalent to `git branch -r`, which the OP said wasn't good enough. – Cascabel Aug 12 '10 at 23:10
11

actually both `git branch -a` and `git branch -r` list all remote branches for me, I'm not sure if what the OP said is true. I just setup a test repository and verified this (only had master tracking origin/master but still saw all remote branches with both flags). – Idan K Aug 13 '10 at 11:01
2

seems this doesn't list all remote branches if I clone from an existing pulled repo and then manually point origin at the git server. The accepted answer handles this case. – nielsbot Oct 17 '13 at 00:59
This solution doesn't seem to list remote branches created since I last fetched. – Anubian Noob Jul 06 '15 at 13:56
The strange thing: For years I've used `git fetch` followed by `git branch -a`, which only recently started to fail for me. Perhaps git behaviour was changed? – Sebastian Mach Aug 17 '15 at 11:43

score 30 · Answer 5 · answered Mar 24 '13 at 11:25

30

But

git branch -ar

should do it.

answered Mar 24 '13 at 11:25

Seakayone

610
5
11

51

Passing in both arguments is redundant. `-r` returns _only_ remote branches. `-a` returns both local _and_ remote branches. Thus, `git branch -a` and `git branch -ar` both yield the same output. – Walter Roman Jan 04 '14 at 00:12

score 28 · Answer 6 · edited Jul 04 '17 at 21:08

28

Git Branching - Remote Branches

git ls-remote

Git documentation.

edited Jul 04 '17 at 21:08

Ninjakannon

3,751
7
53
76

answered Aug 14 '16 at 14:35

Michael Horojanski

4,543
4
33
34

git ls-remote --heads to get more specific results – Wolfgang Fahl Aug 20 '18 at 09:26
1

This is the only command that also lists my branch I accidentally pushed without `heads/` in `refs/heads/features/my-branch`, thanks! – msa Feb 11 '19 at 11:13
I like this. If you want to filter then you can use grep like this: git ls-remote | grep "your_filter". – marcello Jun 25 '20 at 19:13

score 24 · Answer 7 · answered Mar 04 '14 at 09:22

24

You also may do git fetch followed by a git branch -r. Without fetch you will not see the most current branches.

answered Mar 04 '14 at 09:22

Max Sohrt

1,076
9
5

1

`git fetch --all` to have all current branches – A. Attia May 04 '18 at 12:21

score 16 · Answer 8 · edited Oct 23 '19 at 11:58

16

Just run a git fetch command. It will pull all the remote branches to your local repository, and then do a git branch -a to list all the branches.

edited Oct 23 '19 at 11:58

Peter Mortensen

30,738
21
105
131

answered Aug 19 '19 at 09:33

Manjunatha B

276
3
9

`-a`, that was simple! – Alexis Wilke Jun 02 '22 at 21:56

score 13 · Answer 9 · answered Aug 04 '17 at 14:42

13

The simplest way I found:

git branch -a

answered Aug 04 '17 at 14:42

developer_hatch

15,898
3
42
75

score 13 · Answer 10 · edited Oct 23 '19 at 11:56

13

Try this...

git fetch origin
git branch -a

edited Oct 23 '19 at 11:56

Peter Mortensen

30,738
21
105
131

answered Feb 28 '19 at 09:14

Ashish Mehta

158
1
6

simhumileco · Answer 11 · 2017-10-28T16:42:11.830

12

TL;TR;

This is the solution of your problem:

git remote update --prune    # To update all remotes
git branch -r                # To display remote branches

or:

git remote update --prune    # To update all remotes
git branch <TAB>             # To display all branches

edited Oct 28 '17 at 16:42

answered Oct 28 '17 at 16:21

simhumileco

31,877
16
137
115

score 10 · Answer 12 · edited Oct 23 '19 at 11:55

10

With Git Bash, you can use:

git branch -a

edited Oct 23 '19 at 11:55

Peter Mortensen

30,738
21
105
131

answered Dec 12 '17 at 13:13

Issam Ressani

203
1
4
7

score 9 · Answer 13 · answered Jul 06 '15 at 14:33

The best command to run is git remote show [remote]. This will show all branches, remote and local, tracked and untracked.

Here's an example from an open source project:

> git remote show origin
* remote origin
  Fetch URL: https://github.com/OneBusAway/onebusaway-android
  Push  URL: https://github.com/OneBusAway/onebusaway-android
  HEAD branch: master
  Remote branches:
    amazon-rc2                   new (next fetch will store in remotes/origin)
    amazon-rc3                   new (next fetch will store in remotes/origin)
    arrivalStyleBDefault         new (next fetch will store in remotes/origin)
    develop                      tracked
    master                       tracked
    refs/remotes/origin/branding stale (use 'git remote prune' to remove)
  Local branches configured for 'git pull':
    develop merges with remote develop
    master  merges with remote master
  Local refs configured for 'git push':
    develop pushes to develop (local out of date)
    master  pushes to master  (up to date)

If we just want to get the remote branches, we can use grep. The command we'd want to use would be:

grep "\w*\s*(new|tracked)" -E

With this command:

> git remote show origin | grep "\w*\s*(new|tracked)" -E
    amazon-rc2                   new (next fetch will store in remotes/origin)
    amazon-rc3                   new (next fetch will store in remotes/origin)
    arrivalStyleBDefault         new (next fetch will store in remotes/origin)
    develop                      tracked
    master                       tracked

You can also create an alias for this:

git config --global alias.branches "!git remote show origin | grep \w*\s*(new|tracked) -E"

Then you can just run git branches.

score 9 · Answer 14 · answered Oct 11 '21 at 17:47

Assuming you have the following branches on a remote repository: git branch -a gives you:

*remotes/origin/release/1.5.0
 remotes/origin/release/1.5.1
 remotes/origin/release/1.5.2
 remotes/origin/release/1.5.3
 remotes/origin/release/1.6.0

Based on above result command git branch -rl '*/origin/release/1.5*' gives you this:

 origin/release/1.5.1
 origin/release/1.5.2
 origin/release/1.5.3

-r stands for remote

-l list using <pattern>

score 7 · Answer 15 · answered May 25 '20 at 16:34

7

The accepted answer works for me. But I found it more useful to have the commits sorted starting with the most recent.

git branch -r --sort=-committerdate

https://git-scm.com/docs/git-branch

answered May 25 '20 at 16:34

Gabe Gates

902
1
14
19

score 6 · Answer 16 · edited Oct 23 '19 at 11:57

6

I would use:

git branch -av

This command not only shows you the list of all branches, including remote branches starting with /remote, but it also provides you the * feedback on what you updated and the last commit comments.

edited Oct 23 '19 at 11:57

Peter Mortensen

30,738
21
105
131

answered Apr 24 '19 at 12:39

prosti

42,291
14
186
151

score 2 · Answer 17 · edited Oct 23 '19 at 11:54

2

I ended up doing a mess shell pipeline to get what I wanted. I just merged branches from the origin remote:

git branch -r --all --merged \
    | tail -n +2 \
    | grep -P '^  remotes/origin/(?!HEAD)' \
    | perl -p -e 's/^  remotes\/origin\///g;s/master\n//g'

edited Oct 23 '19 at 11:54

Peter Mortensen

30,738
21
105
131

answered Jul 31 '15 at 18:49

ThorSummoner

16,657
15
135
147

score 2 · Answer 18 · answered Jul 23 '19 at 20:00

If there's a remote branch that you know should be listed, but it isn't getting listed, you might want to verify that your origin is set up properly with this:

git remote show origin

If that's all good, maybe you should run an update:

git remote update

Assuming that runs successfully, you should be able to do what the other answers say:

git branch -r

score 1 · Answer 19 · edited Oct 23 '19 at 11:56

Using this command,

git log -r --oneline --no-merges --simplify-by-decoration --pretty=format:"%n %Cred CommitID %Creset: %h %n %Cred Remote Branch %Creset :%d %n %Cred Commit Message %Creset: %s %n"

CommitID       : 27385d919
Remote Branch  : (origin/ALPHA)
Commit Message :  New branch created

It lists all remote branches including commit messages and commit IDs that are referred to by remote branches.

score 0 · Answer 20 · answered Jun 13 '14 at 09:28

0

Make sure that the remote origin you are listing is really the repository that you want and not an older clone.

answered Jun 13 '14 at 09:28

user3737174

11

score 0 · Answer 21 · answered Nov 28 '22 at 04:08

0

Use this command to get all the branches,

git fetch --all

answered Nov 28 '22 at 04:08

Murugan

95
2
12

score 0 · Answer 22 · answered May 08 '23 at 15:13

What about stale branches?

The other answers don't account for stale branches. Stale branches are references to remote branches that don't actually exist on remote anymore.

The top-voted answer does not return stale branches:

git branch -r

However, if you run this, you will get stale branches:

git remote show <remote>

To delete the stale branches, you can do

git remote prune <remote>

What if git is not fetching all remote branches?

Sometimes this happens, where git pull or git fetch does not pull branches from origin.

To fix that, take a look at this question. In particular, you might want to run:

git remote update <remote>

Then when you do git fetch, all remote branches will actually be fetched.

See https://stackoverflow.com/a/11624159/1292652

How do I list all remote branches in Git 1.7+?

22 Answers22

What about stale branches?

What if git is not fetching all remote branches?

Linked