Toll Free Numbers
  • Last 5 Forum Topics
    Last post

The Web Only This Site



  • MARC

    Mailing list ARChives
    - Search by -


    Computing Dictionary

  • Text Link Ads
  • LINUX man pages
  • Linux Man Page Viewer

    The following form allows you to view linux man pages.





           git rebase [-i | --interactive] [options] [--onto <newbase>]
                   <upstream> [<branch>]
           git rebase [-i | --interactive] [options] --onto <newbase>
                   --root [<branch>]
           git rebase --continue | --skip | --abort


           If <branch> is specified, git rebase will perform an automatic git
           checkout <branch> before doing anything else. Otherwise it remains on
           the current branch.
           All changes made by commits in the current branch but that are not in
           <upstream> are saved to a temporary area. This is the same set of
           commits that would be shown by git log <upstream>..HEAD (or git log
           HEAD, if --root is specified).
           The current branch is reset to <upstream>, or <newbase> if the --onto
           option was supplied. This has the exact same effect as git reset --hard
           <upstream> (or <newbase>). ORIG_HEAD is set to point at the tip of the
           branch before the reset.
           The commits that were previously saved into the temporary area are then
           reapplied to the current branch, one by one, in order. Note that any
           commits in HEAD which introduce the same textual changes as a commit in
           HEAD..<upstream> are omitted (i.e., a patch already accepted upstream
           with a different commit message or timestamp will be skipped).
           It is possible that a merge failure will prevent this process from
           being completely automatic. You will have to resolve any such merge
           failure and run git rebase --continue. Another option is to bypass the
           commit that caused the merge failure with git rebase --skip. To restore
           the original <branch> and remove the .git/rebase-apply working files,
           use the command git rebase --abort instead.
           Assume the following history exists and the current branch is "topic":
                         A---B---C topic
                   D---E---F---G master
           From this point, the result of either of the following commands:
               git rebase master
               git rebase master topic
           would be:
                                 A?--B?--C? topic
                   D---E---A?---F master
           will result in:
                                  B?---C? topic
                   D---E---A?---F master
           Here is how you would transplant a topic branch based on one branch to
           another, to pretend that you forked the topic branch from the latter
           branch, using rebase --onto.
           First let's assume your topic is based on branch next. For example, a
           feature developed in topic depends on some functionality which is found
           in next.
                   o---o---o---o---o  master
                         o---o---o---o---o  next
                                           o---o---o  topic
           We want to make topic forked from branch master; for example, because
           the functionality on which topic depends was merged into the more
           stable master branch. We want our tree to look like this:
                   o---o---o---o---o  master
                       |            \
                       |             o?--o?--o?  topic
                         o---o---o---o---o  next
           We can get this using the following command:
               git rebase --onto master next topic
           Another example of --onto option is to rebase part of a branch. If we
           have the following situation:
                                           H---I---J topicB
                                 E---F---G  topicA
                   A---B---C---D  master
           then the command
           A range of commits could also be removed with rebase. If we have the
           following situation:
                   E---F---G---H---I---J  topicA
           then the command
               git rebase --onto topicA~5 topicA~3 topicA
           would result in the removal of commits F and G:
                   E---H?---I?---J?  topicA
           This is useful if F and G were flawed in some way, or should not be
           part of topicA. Note that the argument to --onto and the <upstream>
           parameter can be any valid commit-ish.
           In case of conflict, git rebase will stop at the first problematic
           commit and leave conflict markers in the tree. You can use git diff to
           locate the markers (<<<<<<) and make edits to resolve the conflict. For
           each file you edit, you need to tell git that the conflict has been
           resolved, typically this would be done with
               git add <filename>
           After resolving the conflict manually and updating the index with the
           desired resolution, you can continue the rebasing process with
               git rebase --continue
           Alternatively, you can undo the git rebase with
               git rebase --abort


               Whether to show a diffstat of what changed upstream since the last
               rebase. False by default.


               Starting point at which to create the new commits. If the --onto
               option is not specified, the starting point is <upstream>. May be
               any valid commit, and not just an existing branch name.
               Upstream branch to compare against. May be any valid commit, not
               just an existing branch name.
               merge strategy is used, this allows rebase to be aware of renames
               on the upstream side.
               Note that a rebase merge works by replaying each commit from the
               working branch on top of the <upstream> branch. Because of this,
               when a merge conflict happens, the side reported as ours is the
               so-far rebased series, starting with <upstream>, and theirs is the
               working branch. In other words, the sides are swapped.
           -s <strategy>, --strategy=<strategy>
               Use the given merge strategy. If there is no -s option git
               merge-recursive is used instead. This implies --merge.
               Because git rebase replays each commit from the working branch on
               top of the <upstream> branch using the given strategy, using the
               ours strategy simply discards all patches from the <branch>, which
               makes little sense.
           -q, --quiet
               Be quiet. Implies --no-stat.
           -v, --verbose
               Be verbose. Implies --stat.
               Show a diffstat of what changed upstream since the last rebase. The
               diffstat is also controlled by the configuration option
           -n, --no-stat
               Do not show a diffstat as part of the rebase process.
               This option bypasses the pre-rebase hook. See also githooks(5).
               Ensure at least <n> lines of surrounding context match before and
               after each change. When fewer lines of surrounding context exist
               they all must match. By default no context is ever ignored.
           -f, --force-rebase
               Force the rebase even if the current branch is a descendant of the
               commit you are rebasing onto. Normally non-interactive rebase will
               exit with the message "Current branch is up to date" in such a
               situation. Incompatible with the --interactive option.
               You may find this (or --no-ff with an interactive rebase) helpful
               after reverting a topic branch merge, as this option recreates the
               topic branch with fresh commits so it can be remerged successfully
               without needing to "revert the reversion" (see the
               revert-a-faulty-merge How-To[1] for details).
               Instead of ignoring merges, try to recreate them.
               Rebase all commits reachable from <branch>, instead of limiting
               them with an <upstream>. This allows you to rebase the root
               commit(s) on a branch. Must be used with --onto, and will skip
               changes already contained in <newbase> (instead of <upstream>).
               When used together with --preserve-merges, all root commits will be
               rewritten to have <newbase> as parent instead.
               When the commit log message begins with "squash! ..." (or "fixup!
               ..."), and there is a commit whose title begins with the same ...,
               automatically modify the todo list of rebase -i so that the commit
               marked for squashing comes right after the commit to be modified,
               and change the action of the moved commit from pick to squash (or
               This option is only valid when the --interactive option is used.
               With --interactive, cherry-pick all rebased commits instead of
               fast-forwarding over the unchanged ones. This ensures that the
               entire history of the rebased branch is composed of new commits.
               Without --interactive, this is a synonym for --force-rebase.
               You may find this helpful after reverting a topic branch merge, as
               this option recreates the topic branch with fresh commits so it can
               be remerged successfully without needing to "revert the reversion"
               (see the revert-a-faulty-merge How-To[1] for details).


           The merge mechanism (git-merge and git-pull commands) allows the
           backend merge strategies to be chosen with -s option. Some strategies
           can also take their own options, which can be passed by giving
           -X<option> arguments to git-merge and/or git-pull.
               This can only resolve two heads (i.e. the current branch and
               another branch you pulled from) using a 3-way merge algorithm. It
               tries to carefully detect criss-cross merge ambiguities and is
               considered generally safe and fast.
               This can only resolve two heads using a 3-way merge algorithm. When
               there is more than one common ancestor that can be used for 3-way
               merge, it creates a merged tree of the common ancestors and uses
               that as the reference tree for the 3-way merge. This has been
               reported to result in fewer merge conflicts without causing
               mis-merges by tests done on actual merge commits taken from Linux
               2.6 kernel development history. Additionally this can detect and
                   contains all that happened in it.
                   This is opposite of ours.
                   This option is a more advanced form of subtree strategy, where
                   the strategy makes a guess on how two trees must be shifted to
                   match with each other when merging. Instead, the specified path
                   is prefixed (or stripped from the beginning) to make the shape
                   of two trees to match.
               This resolves cases with more than two heads, but refuses to do a
               complex merge that needs manual resolution. It is primarily meant
               to be used for bundling topic branch heads together. This is the
               default merge strategy when pulling or merging more than one
               This resolves any number of heads, but the resulting tree of the
               merge is always that of the current branch head, effectively
               ignoring all changes from all other branches. It is meant to be
               used to supersede old development history of side branches. Note
               that this is different from the -Xours option to the recursive
               merge strategy.
               This is a modified recursive strategy. When merging trees A and B,
               if B corresponds to a subtree of A, B is first adjusted to match
               the tree structure of A, instead of reading the trees at the same
               level. This adjustment is also done to the common ancestor tree.


           You should understand the implications of using git rebase on a
           repository that you share. See also RECOVERING FROM UPSTREAM REBASE
           When the git-rebase command is run, it will first execute a
           "pre-rebase" hook if one exists. You can use this hook to do sanity
           checks and reject the rebase if it isn't appropriate. Please see the
           template pre-rebase hook script for an example.
           Upon completion, <branch> will be the current branch.


           Rebasing interactively means that you have a chance to edit the commits
           which are rebased. You can reorder the commits, and you can remove them
           (weeding out bad or otherwise unwanted patches).
           The interactive mode is meant for this type of workflow:
                2. commit
            2. independent fixup
                1. realize that something does not work
                2. fix that
                3. commit it
           Sometimes the thing fixed in b.2. cannot be amended to the not-quite
           perfect commit it fixes, because that commit is buried deeply in a
           patch series. That is exactly what interactive rebase is for: use it
           after plenty of "a"s and "b"s, by rearranging and editing commits, and
           squashing multiple commits into one.
           Start it with the last commit you want to retain as-is:
               git rebase -i <after-this-commit>
           An editor will be fired up with all the commits in your current branch
           (ignoring merge commits), which come after the given commit. You can
           reorder the commits in this list to your heart's content, and you can
           remove them. The list looks more or less like this:
               pick deadbee The oneline of this commit
               pick fa1afe1 The oneline of the next commit
           The oneline descriptions are purely for your pleasure; git rebase will
           not look at them but at the commit names ("deadbee" and "fa1afe1" in
           this example), so do not delete or edit the names.
           By replacing the command "pick" with the command "edit", you can tell
           git rebase to stop after applying that commit, so that you can edit the
           files and/or the commit message, amend the commit, and continue
           If you just want to edit the commit message for a commit, replace the
           command "pick" with the command "reword".
           If you want to fold two or more commits into one, replace the command
           "pick" for the second and subsequent commits with "squash" or "fixup".
           If the commits had different authors, the folded commit will be
           attributed to the author of the first commit. The suggested commit
           message for the folded commit is the concatenation of the commit
           messages of the first commit and of those with the "squash" command,
           but omits the commit messages of commits with the "fixup" command.
           git rebase will stop when "pick" has been replaced with "edit" or when
           a command fails due to merge errors. When you are done editing and/or
           Suppose you want to rebase the side branch starting at "A" to "Q". Make
           sure that the current HEAD is "B", and call
               $ git rebase -i -p --onto Q O


           In interactive mode, you can mark commits with the action "edit".
           However, this does not necessarily mean that git rebase expects the
           result of this edit to be exactly one commit. Indeed, you can undo the
           commit, or you can add other commits. This can be used to split a
           commit into two:
           ?   Start an interactive rebase with git rebase -i <commit>^, where
               <commit> is the commit you want to split. In fact, any commit range
               will do, as long as it contains that commit.
           ?   Mark the commit you want to split with the action "edit".
           ?   When it comes to editing that commit, execute git reset HEAD^. The
               effect is that the HEAD is rewound by one, and the index follows
               suit. However, the working tree stays the same.
           ?   Now add the changes to the index that you want to have in the first
               commit. You can use git add (possibly interactively) or git gui (or
               both) to do that.
           ?   Commit the now-current index with whatever commit message is
               appropriate now.
           ?   Repeat the last two steps until your working tree is clean.
           ?   Continue the rebase with git rebase --continue.
           If you are not absolutely sure that the intermediate revisions are
           consistent (they compile, pass the testsuite, etc.) you should use git
           stash to stash away the not-yet-committed changes after each commit,
           test, and amend the commit if fixes are necessary.


           Rebasing (or any other form of rewriting) a branch that others have
           based work on is a bad idea: anyone downstream of it is forced to
           manually fix their history. This section explains how to do the fix
           from the downstream's point of view. The real fix, however, would be to
           avoid rebasing the upstream in the first place.
                        \                       \
                         o---o---o---o---o       o?--o?--o?--o?--o?  subsystem
                                           *---*---*  topic
           If you now continue development as usual, and eventually merge topic to
           subsystem, the commits from subsystem will remain duplicated forever:
                   o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o  master
                        \                       \
                         o---o---o---o---o       o?--o?--o?--o?--o?--M  subsystem
                                          \                         /
                                           *---*---*-..........-*--*  topic
           Such duplicates are generally frowned upon because they clutter up
           history, making it harder to follow. To clean things up, you need to
           transplant the commits on topic to the new subsystem tip, i.e., rebase
           topic. This becomes a ripple effect: anyone downstream from topic is
           forced to rebase too, and so on!
           There are two kinds of fixes, discussed in the following subsections:
           Easy case: The changes are literally the same.
               This happens if the subsystem rebase was a simple rebase and had no
           Hard case: The changes are not the same.
               This happens if the subsystem rebase had conflicts, or used
               --interactive to omit, edit, squash, or fixup commits; or if the
               upstream used one of commit --amend, reset, or filter-branch.
       The easy case
           Only works if the changes (patch IDs based on the diff contents) on
           subsystem are literally the same before and after the rebase subsystem
           In that case, the fix is easy because git rebase knows to skip changes
           that are already present in the new upstream. So if you say (assuming
           you're on topic)
                   $ git rebase subsystem
           you will end up with the fixed history
                   o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o  master
                                                 o?--o?--o?--o?--o?  subsystem
                                                                   *---*---*  topic
           was. You will have to find a way to name the last commit of the old
           subsystem, for example:
           ?   With the subsystem reflog: after git fetch, the old tip of
               subsystem is at subsystem@{1}. Subsequent fetches will increase the
               number. (See git-reflog(1).)
           ?   Relative to the tip of topic: knowing that your topic has three
               commits, the old tip of subsystem must be topic~3.
           You can then transplant the old subsystem..topic to the new tip by
           saying (for the reflog case, and assuming you are on topic already):
                   $ git rebase --onto subsystem subsystem@{1}
           The ripple effect of a "hard case" recovery is especially bad: everyone
           downstream from topic will now have to perform a "hard case" recovery


           Written by Junio C Hamano <[2]> and Johannes E.
           Schindelin <[3]>


           Documentation by Junio C Hamano and the git-list


           Part of the git(1) suite


            1. revert-a-faulty-merge How-To

    Git 1.7.1 03/04/2013 GIT-REBASE(1)


  • Linux

    The Distributions


    The Software


    The News


  • Toll Free

Toll Free Numbers
Copyright © 1999 - 2016 by LinuxGuruz