2005-09-08 00:26:23 +00:00
|
|
|
git-rebase(1)
|
|
|
|
=============
|
2005-08-23 08:49:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NAME
|
|
|
|
----
|
2007-01-18 23:53:37 +00:00
|
|
|
git-rebase - Forward-port local commits to the updated upstream head
|
2005-08-23 08:49:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SYNOPSIS
|
|
|
|
--------
|
2007-05-18 13:39:33 +00:00
|
|
|
[verse]
|
2009-01-02 22:28:29 +00:00
|
|
|
'git rebase' [-i | --interactive] [options] [--onto <newbase>]
|
|
|
|
<upstream> [<branch>]
|
|
|
|
'git rebase' [-i | --interactive] [options] --onto <newbase>
|
|
|
|
--root [<branch>]
|
|
|
|
|
2008-06-30 06:09:04 +00:00
|
|
|
'git rebase' --continue | --skip | --abort
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2005-08-23 08:49:47 +00:00
|
|
|
DESCRIPTION
|
|
|
|
-----------
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
If <branch> is specified, 'git rebase' will perform an automatic
|
2007-02-17 09:31:50 +00:00
|
|
|
`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
|
2009-01-02 22:28:29 +00:00
|
|
|
of commits that would be shown by `git log <upstream>..HEAD` (or
|
|
|
|
`git log HEAD`, if --root is specified).
|
2007-02-17 09:31:50 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The current branch is reset to <upstream>, or <newbase> if the
|
|
|
|
--onto option was supplied. This has the exact same effect as
|
2008-07-08 04:12:22 +00:00
|
|
|
`git reset --hard <upstream>` (or <newbase>). ORIG_HEAD is set
|
|
|
|
to point at the tip of the branch before the reset.
|
2007-02-17 09:31:50 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The commits that were previously saved into the temporary area are
|
2007-10-15 04:47:30 +00:00
|
|
|
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).
|
2006-02-22 01:10:12 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
It is possible that a merge failure will prevent this process from being
|
|
|
|
completely automatic. You will have to resolve any such merge failure
|
2006-05-14 03:34:08 +00:00
|
|
|
and run `git rebase --continue`. Another option is to bypass the commit
|
|
|
|
that caused the merge failure with `git rebase --skip`. To restore the
|
2008-07-21 10:51:02 +00:00
|
|
|
original <branch> and remove the .git/rebase-apply working files, use the
|
|
|
|
command `git rebase --abort` instead.
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2006-02-22 01:10:12 +00:00
|
|
|
Assume the following history exists and the current branch is "topic":
|
|
|
|
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
------------
|
2006-02-22 01:10:12 +00:00
|
|
|
A---B---C topic
|
|
|
|
/
|
|
|
|
D---E---F---G master
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
------------
|
2006-02-22 01:10:12 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2006-03-18 00:25:30 +00:00
|
|
|
From this point, the result of either of the following commands:
|
2006-02-22 01:10:12 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2008-06-30 06:09:04 +00:00
|
|
|
git rebase master
|
|
|
|
git rebase master topic
|
2006-02-22 01:10:12 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
would be:
|
|
|
|
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
------------
|
2006-02-22 01:10:12 +00:00
|
|
|
A'--B'--C' topic
|
|
|
|
/
|
|
|
|
D---E---F---G master
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
------------
|
2006-02-22 01:10:12 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2006-11-06 18:12:45 +00:00
|
|
|
The latter form is just a short-hand of `git checkout topic`
|
|
|
|
followed by `git rebase master`.
|
2006-02-22 01:10:12 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2007-10-15 04:47:30 +00:00
|
|
|
If the upstream branch already contains a change you have made (e.g.,
|
|
|
|
because you mailed a patch which was applied upstream), then that commit
|
2008-06-30 06:09:04 +00:00
|
|
|
will be skipped. For example, running `git rebase master` on the
|
2007-10-15 04:47:30 +00:00
|
|
|
following history (in which A' and A introduce the same set of changes,
|
|
|
|
but have different committer information):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------
|
|
|
|
A---B---C topic
|
|
|
|
/
|
|
|
|
D---E---A'---F master
|
|
|
|
------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
will result in:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------
|
|
|
|
B'---C' topic
|
|
|
|
/
|
|
|
|
D---E---A'---F master
|
|
|
|
------------
|
|
|
|
|
2006-11-06 18:12:45 +00:00
|
|
|
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`.
|
2006-02-22 01:10:12 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2006-11-06 18:12:45 +00:00
|
|
|
First let's assume your 'topic' is based on branch 'next'.
|
2008-09-24 09:51:27 +00:00
|
|
|
For example, a feature developed in 'topic' depends on some
|
2006-11-06 18:12:45 +00:00
|
|
|
functionality which is found in 'next'.
|
2006-02-22 01:10:12 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
------------
|
2006-11-06 18:12:45 +00:00
|
|
|
o---o---o---o---o master
|
|
|
|
\
|
|
|
|
o---o---o---o---o next
|
|
|
|
\
|
|
|
|
o---o---o topic
|
|
|
|
------------
|
|
|
|
|
2008-09-24 09:51:27 +00:00
|
|
|
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:
|
2006-11-06 18:12:45 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------
|
|
|
|
o---o---o---o---o master
|
|
|
|
| \
|
|
|
|
| o'--o'--o' topic
|
|
|
|
\
|
|
|
|
o---o---o---o---o next
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
------------
|
2005-08-23 08:49:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2006-11-06 18:12:45 +00:00
|
|
|
We can get this using the following command:
|
|
|
|
|
2008-06-30 06:09:04 +00:00
|
|
|
git rebase --onto master next topic
|
2006-11-06 18:12:45 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
2008-06-30 06:09:04 +00:00
|
|
|
git rebase --onto master topicA topicB
|
2006-11-06 18:12:45 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
would result in:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------
|
|
|
|
H'--I'--J' topicB
|
|
|
|
/
|
|
|
|
| E---F---G topicA
|
|
|
|
|/
|
|
|
|
A---B---C---D master
|
|
|
|
------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is useful when topicB does not depend on topicA.
|
|
|
|
|
2007-02-05 20:21:06 +00:00
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
2008-06-30 06:09:04 +00:00
|
|
|
git rebase --onto topicA~5 topicA~3 topicA
|
2007-02-05 20:21:06 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
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
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-02-17 09:43:42 +00:00
|
|
|
git add <filename>
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After resolving the conflict manually and updating the index with the
|
|
|
|
desired resolution, you can continue the rebasing process with
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
git rebase --continue
|
2006-03-26 20:29:28 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
Alternatively, you can undo the 'git rebase' with
|
2006-03-26 20:29:28 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
git rebase --abort
|
2006-03-26 20:29:28 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-01 22:11:38 +00:00
|
|
|
CONFIGURATION
|
|
|
|
-------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rebase.stat::
|
|
|
|
Whether to show a diffstat of what changed upstream since the last
|
|
|
|
rebase. False by default.
|
|
|
|
|
2005-08-23 08:49:47 +00:00
|
|
|
OPTIONS
|
|
|
|
-------
|
2006-02-22 01:10:12 +00:00
|
|
|
<newbase>::
|
|
|
|
Starting point at which to create the new commits. If the
|
|
|
|
--onto option is not specified, the starting point is
|
2007-02-05 20:21:06 +00:00
|
|
|
<upstream>. May be any valid commit, and not just an
|
|
|
|
existing branch name.
|
2006-02-22 01:10:12 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2005-08-27 01:18:48 +00:00
|
|
|
<upstream>::
|
2007-02-05 20:21:06 +00:00
|
|
|
Upstream branch to compare against. May be any valid commit,
|
|
|
|
not just an existing branch name.
|
2005-08-23 08:49:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2006-03-18 00:25:30 +00:00
|
|
|
<branch>::
|
2005-08-27 01:18:48 +00:00
|
|
|
Working branch; defaults to HEAD.
|
2005-08-23 08:49:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
--continue::
|
|
|
|
Restart the rebasing process after having resolved a merge conflict.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--abort::
|
|
|
|
Restore the original branch and abort the rebase operation.
|
|
|
|
|
2006-06-21 10:04:41 +00:00
|
|
|
--skip::
|
|
|
|
Restart the rebasing process by skipping the current patch.
|
|
|
|
|
2008-06-08 01:36:09 +00:00
|
|
|
-m::
|
|
|
|
--merge::
|
2006-06-21 10:04:41 +00:00
|
|
|
Use merging strategies to rebase. When the recursive (default) merge
|
|
|
|
strategy is used, this allows rebase to be aware of renames on the
|
|
|
|
upstream side.
|
2009-11-15 18:25:31 +00:00
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
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.
|
2006-06-21 10:04:41 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2008-06-08 01:36:09 +00:00
|
|
|
-s <strategy>::
|
|
|
|
--strategy=<strategy>::
|
2009-05-21 09:47:07 +00:00
|
|
|
Use the given merge strategy.
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
If there is no `-s` option 'git merge-recursive' is used
|
2009-11-15 18:25:31 +00:00
|
|
|
instead. This implies --merge.
|
|
|
|
+
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
Because 'git rebase' replays each commit from the working branch
|
2009-11-15 18:25:31 +00:00
|
|
|
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.
|
2006-06-21 10:04:41 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-06-16 22:33:01 +00:00
|
|
|
-q::
|
|
|
|
--quiet::
|
|
|
|
Be quiet. Implies --no-stat.
|
|
|
|
|
2008-06-08 01:36:09 +00:00
|
|
|
-v::
|
|
|
|
--verbose::
|
2009-03-01 22:11:38 +00:00
|
|
|
Be verbose. Implies --stat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
--stat::
|
|
|
|
Show a diffstat of what changed upstream since the last rebase. The
|
|
|
|
diffstat is also controlled by the configuration option rebase.stat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-n::
|
|
|
|
--no-stat::
|
|
|
|
Do not show a diffstat as part of the rebase process.
|
2006-10-03 16:29:31 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2008-10-13 23:17:16 +00:00
|
|
|
--no-verify::
|
|
|
|
This option bypasses the pre-rebase hook. See also linkgit:githooks[5].
|
|
|
|
|
2007-02-08 13:57:08 +00:00
|
|
|
-C<n>::
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
2009-03-18 20:53:39 +00:00
|
|
|
-f::
|
|
|
|
--force-rebase::
|
|
|
|
Force the rebase even if the current branch is a descendant
|
|
|
|
of the commit you are rebasing onto. Normally the command will
|
|
|
|
exit with the message "Current branch is up to date" in such a
|
|
|
|
situation.
|
|
|
|
|
2009-08-04 11:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
--ignore-whitespace::
|
2009-02-28 18:42:02 +00:00
|
|
|
--whitespace=<option>::
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
These flag are passed to the 'git apply' program
|
2007-12-29 06:20:38 +00:00
|
|
|
(see linkgit:git-apply[1]) that applies the patch.
|
2009-02-12 10:21:19 +00:00
|
|
|
Incompatible with the --interactive option.
|
2007-09-07 14:20:50 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-18 20:53:49 +00:00
|
|
|
--committer-date-is-author-date::
|
|
|
|
--ignore-date::
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
These flags are passed to 'git am' to easily change the dates
|
2009-03-18 20:53:49 +00:00
|
|
|
of the rebased commits (see linkgit:git-am[1]).
|
|
|
|
|
2008-06-08 01:36:09 +00:00
|
|
|
-i::
|
|
|
|
--interactive::
|
2007-06-25 00:11:14 +00:00
|
|
|
Make a list of the commits which are about to be rebased. Let the
|
2007-08-31 17:10:21 +00:00
|
|
|
user edit that list before rebasing. This mode can also be used to
|
|
|
|
split commits (see SPLITTING COMMITS below).
|
2007-06-25 00:11:14 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2008-06-08 01:36:09 +00:00
|
|
|
-p::
|
|
|
|
--preserve-merges::
|
2008-09-29 20:28:57 +00:00
|
|
|
Instead of ignoring merges, try to recreate them.
|
2007-06-25 17:59:43 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-01-02 22:28:29 +00:00
|
|
|
--root::
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
2009-12-08 03:13:14 +00:00
|
|
|
--autosquash::
|
|
|
|
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
|
2010-01-21 20:34:25 +00:00
|
|
|
so that the commit marked for squashing comes right after the
|
2009-12-08 03:13:14 +00:00
|
|
|
commit to be modified, and change the action of the moved
|
|
|
|
commit from `pick` to `squash` (or `fixup`).
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
This option is only valid when '--interactive' option is used.
|
|
|
|
|
2006-06-21 10:04:41 +00:00
|
|
|
include::merge-strategies.txt[]
|
|
|
|
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
NOTES
|
|
|
|
-----
|
2008-09-13 16:11:00 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
You should understand the implications of using 'git rebase' on a
|
2008-09-13 16:11:00 +00:00
|
|
|
repository that you share. See also RECOVERING FROM UPSTREAM REBASE
|
|
|
|
below.
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2008-07-03 05:28:15 +00:00
|
|
|
When the git-rebase command is run, it will first execute a "pre-rebase"
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
2008-03-10 14:38:33 +00:00
|
|
|
Upon completion, <branch> will be the current branch.
|
2006-04-26 14:49:38 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2007-06-25 00:11:14 +00:00
|
|
|
INTERACTIVE MODE
|
|
|
|
----------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. have a wonderful idea
|
|
|
|
2. hack on the code
|
|
|
|
3. prepare a series for submission
|
|
|
|
4. submit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
where point 2. consists of several instances of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a. regular use
|
|
|
|
1. finish something worthy of a commit
|
|
|
|
2. commit
|
|
|
|
b. 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
|
|
|
|
...
|
|
|
|
-------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
The oneline descriptions are purely for your pleasure; 'git rebase' will
|
2007-06-25 00:11:14 +00:00
|
|
|
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
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
'git rebase' to stop after applying that commit, so that you can edit
|
2007-06-25 00:11:14 +00:00
|
|
|
the files and/or the commit message, amend the commit, and continue
|
|
|
|
rebasing.
|
|
|
|
|
2009-10-07 06:13:23 +00:00
|
|
|
If you just want to edit the commit message for a commit, replace the
|
|
|
|
command "pick" with the command "reword".
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-25 00:11:14 +00:00
|
|
|
If you want to fold two or more commits into one, replace the command
|
2009-12-07 09:20:59 +00:00
|
|
|
"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.
|
2007-06-25 00:11:14 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
'git rebase' will stop when "pick" has been replaced with "edit" or
|
2009-10-07 06:13:23 +00:00
|
|
|
when a command fails due to merge errors. When you are done editing
|
|
|
|
and/or resolving conflicts you can continue with `git rebase --continue`.
|
2007-06-25 00:11:14 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For example, if you want to reorder the last 5 commits, such that what
|
|
|
|
was HEAD~4 becomes the new HEAD. To achieve that, you would call
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
'git rebase' like this:
|
2007-06-25 00:11:14 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
----------------------
|
|
|
|
$ git rebase -i HEAD~5
|
|
|
|
----------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And move the first patch to the end of the list.
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-25 17:59:43 +00:00
|
|
|
You might want to preserve merges, if you have a history like this:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
\
|
|
|
|
A---M---B
|
|
|
|
/
|
|
|
|
---o---O---P---Q
|
|
|
|
------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
-----------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
2007-08-31 17:10:21 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SPLITTING COMMITS
|
|
|
|
-----------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In interactive mode, you can mark commits with the action "edit". However,
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
this does not necessarily mean that 'git rebase' expects the result of this
|
2007-08-31 17:10:21 +00:00
|
|
|
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:
|
|
|
|
|
2008-06-30 18:56:34 +00:00
|
|
|
- Start an interactive rebase with `git rebase -i <commit>^`, where
|
2007-08-31 17:10:21 +00:00
|
|
|
<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".
|
|
|
|
|
2008-06-30 18:56:34 +00:00
|
|
|
- When it comes to editing that commit, execute `git reset HEAD^`. The
|
2007-08-31 17:10:21 +00:00
|
|
|
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
|
2008-06-30 18:56:34 +00:00
|
|
|
commit. You can use `git add` (possibly interactively) or
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
'git gui' (or both) to do that.
|
2007-08-31 17:10:21 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Commit the now-current index with whatever commit message is appropriate
|
|
|
|
now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Repeat the last two steps until your working tree is clean.
|
|
|
|
|
2008-06-30 18:56:34 +00:00
|
|
|
- Continue the rebase with `git rebase --continue`.
|
2007-08-31 17:10:21 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you are not absolutely sure that the intermediate revisions are
|
|
|
|
consistent (they compile, pass the testsuite, etc.) you should use
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
'git stash' to stash away the not-yet-committed changes
|
2007-08-31 17:10:21 +00:00
|
|
|
after each commit, test, and amend the commit if fixes are necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008-09-13 16:11:00 +00:00
|
|
|
RECOVERING FROM UPSTREAM REBASE
|
|
|
|
-------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To illustrate, suppose you are in a situation where someone develops a
|
|
|
|
'subsystem' branch, and you are working on a 'topic' that is dependent
|
|
|
|
on this 'subsystem'. You might end up with a history like the
|
|
|
|
following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------
|
|
|
|
o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o master
|
|
|
|
\
|
|
|
|
o---o---o---o---o subsystem
|
|
|
|
\
|
|
|
|
*---*---* topic
|
|
|
|
------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If 'subsystem' is rebased against 'master', the following happens:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------
|
|
|
|
o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o master
|
|
|
|
\ \
|
|
|
|
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 conflicts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hard case: The changes are not the same.::
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This happens if the 'subsystem' rebase had conflicts, or used
|
2009-12-07 09:20:59 +00:00
|
|
|
`\--interactive` to omit, edit, squash, or fixup commits; or
|
|
|
|
if the upstream used one of `commit \--amend`, `reset`, or
|
2008-09-13 16:11:00 +00:00
|
|
|
`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' did.
|
|
|
|
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
In that case, the fix is easy because 'git rebase' knows to skip
|
2008-09-13 16:11:00 +00:00
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The hard case
|
|
|
|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Things get more complicated if the 'subsystem' changes do not exactly
|
|
|
|
correspond to the ones before the rebase.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE: While an "easy case recovery" sometimes appears to be successful
|
|
|
|
even in the hard case, it may have unintended consequences. For
|
|
|
|
example, a commit that was removed via `git rebase
|
|
|
|
\--interactive` will be **resurrected**!
|
|
|
|
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
The idea is to manually tell 'git rebase' "where the old 'subsystem'
|
2008-09-13 16:11:00 +00:00
|
|
|
ended and your 'topic' began", that is, what the old merge-base
|
|
|
|
between them was. You will have to find a way to name the last commit
|
|
|
|
of the old 'subsystem', for example:
|
|
|
|
|
2010-01-09 23:33:00 +00:00
|
|
|
* With the 'subsystem' reflog: after 'git fetch', the old tip of
|
2008-09-13 16:11:00 +00:00
|
|
|
'subsystem' is at `subsystem@\{1}`. Subsequent fetches will
|
|
|
|
increase the number. (See linkgit: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 too!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007-06-25 00:11:14 +00:00
|
|
|
Authors
|
2005-08-23 08:49:47 +00:00
|
|
|
------
|
2008-07-21 19:14:42 +00:00
|
|
|
Written by Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> and
|
2007-06-25 00:11:14 +00:00
|
|
|
Johannes E. Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
|
2005-08-23 08:49:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Documentation
|
|
|
|
--------------
|
|
|
|
Documentation by Junio C Hamano and the git-list <git@vger.kernel.org>.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GIT
|
|
|
|
---
|
2008-06-06 07:07:32 +00:00
|
|
|
Part of the linkgit:git[1] suite
|