git-rebase(1) — Linux manual page


GIT-REBASE(1)                  Git Manual                  GIT-REBASE(1)

NAME         top

       git-rebase - Reapply commits on top of another base tip

SYNOPSIS         top

       git rebase [-i | --interactive] [<options>] [--exec <cmd>]
               [--onto <newbase> | --keep-base] [<upstream> [<branch>]]
       git rebase [-i | --interactive] [<options>] [--exec <cmd>] [--onto <newbase>]
               --root [<branch>]
       git rebase (--continue | --skip | --abort | --quit | --edit-todo | --show-current-patch)

DESCRIPTION         top

       If <branch> is specified, git rebase will perform an automatic
       git switch <branch> before doing anything else. Otherwise it
       remains on the current branch.

       If <upstream> is not specified, the upstream configured in
       branch.<name>.remote and branch.<name>.merge options will be used
       (see git-config(1) for details) and the --fork-point option is
       assumed. If you are currently not on any branch or if the current
       branch does not have a configured upstream, the rebase will

       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 by git log 'fork_point'..HEAD, if --fork-point is active (see
       the description on --fork-point below); or by git log HEAD, if
       the --root option 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 check out 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

                     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---F---G master

       NOTE: The latter form is just a short-hand of git checkout topic
       followed by git rebase master. When rebase exits topic will
       remain the checked-out branch.

       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 will be skipped. For example, running git rebase
       master on the 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

       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

               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

           git rebase --onto master topicA topicB

       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.

       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

           git rebase --continue

       Alternatively, you can undo the git rebase with

           git rebase --abort

OPTIONS         top

       --onto <newbase>
           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.

           As a special case, you may use "A...B" as a shortcut for the
           merge base of A and B if there is exactly one merge base. You
           can leave out at most one of A and B, in which case it
           defaults to HEAD.

           Set the starting point at which to create the new commits to
           the merge base of <upstream> <branch>. Running git rebase
           --keep-base <upstream> <branch> is equivalent to running git
           rebase --onto <upstream>... <upstream>.

           This option is useful in the case where one is developing a
           feature on top of an upstream branch. While the feature is
           being worked on, the upstream branch may advance and it may
           not be the best idea to keep rebasing on top of the upstream
           but to keep the base commit as-is.

           Although both this option and --fork-point find the merge
           base between <upstream> and <branch>, this option uses the
           merge base as the starting point on which new commits will be
           created, whereas --fork-point uses the merge base to
           determine the set of commits which will be rebased.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

           Upstream branch to compare against. May be any valid commit,
           not just an existing branch name. Defaults to the configured
           upstream for the current branch.

           Working branch; defaults to HEAD.

           Restart the rebasing process after having resolved a merge

           Abort the rebase operation and reset HEAD to the original
           branch. If <branch> was provided when the rebase operation
           was started, then HEAD will be reset to <branch>. Otherwise
           HEAD will be reset to where it was when the rebase operation
           was started.

           Abort the rebase operation but HEAD is not reset back to the
           original branch. The index and working tree are also left
           unchanged as a result. If a temporary stash entry was created
           using --autostash, it will be saved to the stash list.

           Use applying strategies to rebase (calling git-am
           internally). This option may become a no-op in the future
           once the merge backend handles everything the apply one does.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

           How to handle commits that are not empty to start and are not
           clean cherry-picks of any upstream commit, but which become
           empty after rebasing (because they contain a subset of
           already upstream changes). With drop (the default), commits
           that become empty are dropped. With keep, such commits are
           kept. With ask (implied by --interactive), the rebase will
           halt when an empty commit is applied allowing you to choose
           whether to drop it, edit files more, or just commit the empty
           changes. Other options, like --exec, will use the default of
           drop unless -i/--interactive is explicitly specified.

           Note that commits which start empty are kept (unless
           --no-keep-empty is specified), and commits which are clean
           cherry-picks (as determined by git log --cherry-mark ...) are
           detected and dropped as a preliminary step (unless
           --reapply-cherry-picks is passed).

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       --no-keep-empty, --keep-empty
           Do not keep commits that start empty before the rebase (i.e.
           that do not change anything from its parent) in the result.
           The default is to keep commits which start empty, since
           creating such commits requires passing the --allow-empty
           override flag to git commit, signifying that a user is very
           intentionally creating such a commit and thus wants to keep

           Usage of this flag will probably be rare, since you can get
           rid of commits that start empty by just firing up an
           interactive rebase and removing the lines corresponding to
           the commits you don’t want. This flag exists as a convenient
           shortcut, such as for cases where external tools generate
           many empty commits and you want them all removed.

           For commits which do not start empty but become empty after
           rebasing, see the --empty flag.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       --reapply-cherry-picks, --no-reapply-cherry-picks
           Reapply all clean cherry-picks of any upstream commit instead
           of preemptively dropping them. (If these commits then become
           empty after rebasing, because they contain a subset of
           already upstream changes, the behavior towards them is
           controlled by the --empty flag.)

           By default (or if --no-reapply-cherry-picks is given), these
           commits will be automatically dropped. Because this
           necessitates reading all upstream commits, this can be
           expensive in repos with a large number of upstream commits
           that need to be read.

           --reapply-cherry-picks allows rebase to forgo reading all
           upstream commits, potentially improving performance.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

           No-op. Rebasing commits with an empty message used to fail
           and this option would override that behavior, allowing
           commits with empty messages to be rebased. Now commits with
           an empty message do not cause rebasing to halt.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

           Restart the rebasing process by skipping the current patch.

           Edit the todo list during an interactive rebase.

           Show the current patch in an interactive rebase or when
           rebase is stopped because of conflicts. This is the
           equivalent of git show REBASE_HEAD.

       -m, --merge
           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. This is the default.

           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.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       -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 empties all patches
           from the <branch>, which makes little sense.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       -X <strategy-option>, --strategy-option=<strategy-option>
           Pass the <strategy-option> through to the merge strategy.
           This implies --merge and, if no strategy has been specified,
           -s recursive. Note the reversal of ours and theirs as noted
           above for the -m option.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       --rerere-autoupdate, --no-rerere-autoupdate
           Allow the rerere mechanism to update the index with the
           result of auto-conflict resolution if possible.

       -S[<keyid>], --gpg-sign[=<keyid>], --no-gpg-sign
           GPG-sign commits. The keyid argument is optional and defaults
           to the committer identity; if specified, it must be stuck to
           the option without a space.  --no-gpg-sign is useful to
           countermand both commit.gpgSign configuration variable, and
           earlier --gpg-sign.

       -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 rebase.stat.

       -n, --no-stat
           Do not show a diffstat as part of the rebase process.

           This option bypasses the pre-rebase hook. See also

           Allows the pre-rebase hook to run, which is the default. This
           option can be used to override --no-verify. See also

           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. Implies --apply.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       --no-ff, --force-rebase, -f
           Individually replay 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

           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).

       --fork-point, --no-fork-point
           Use reflog to find a better common ancestor between
           <upstream> and <branch> when calculating which commits have
           been introduced by <branch>.

           When --fork-point is active, fork_point will be used instead
           of <upstream> to calculate the set of commits to rebase,
           where fork_point is the result of git merge-base --fork-point
           <upstream> <branch> command (see git-merge-base(1)). If
           fork_point ends up being empty, the <upstream> will be used
           as a fallback.

           If <upstream> is given on the command line, then the default
           is --no-fork-point, otherwise the default is --fork-point.

           If your branch was based on <upstream> but <upstream> was
           rewound and your branch contains commits which were dropped,
           this option can be used with --keep-base in order to drop
           those commits from your branch.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

           Ignore whitespace differences when trying to reconcile
           differences. Currently, each backend implements an
           approximation of this behavior:

           apply backend: When applying a patch, ignore changes in
           whitespace in context lines. Unfortunately, this means that
           if the "old" lines being replaced by the patch differ only in
           whitespace from the existing file, you will get a merge
           conflict instead of a successful patch application.

           merge backend: Treat lines with only whitespace changes as
           unchanged when merging. Unfortunately, this means that any
           patch hunks that were intended to modify whitespace and
           nothing else will be dropped, even if the other side had no
           changes that conflicted.

           This flag is passed to the git apply program (see
           git-apply(1)) that applies the patch. Implies --apply.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

           Instead of using the current time as the committer date, use
           the author date of the commit being rebased as the committer
           date. This option implies --force-rebase.

       --ignore-date, --reset-author-date
           Instead of using the author date of the original commit, use
           the current time as the author date of the rebased commit.
           This option implies --force-rebase.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

           Add a Signed-off-by trailer to all the rebased commits. Note
           that if --interactive is given then only commits marked to be
           picked, edited or reworded will have the trailer added.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       -i, --interactive
           Make a list of the commits which are about to be rebased. Let
           the user edit that list before rebasing. This mode can also
           be used to split commits (see SPLITTING COMMITS below).

           The commit list format can be changed by setting the
           configuration option rebase.instructionFormat. A customized
           instruction format will automatically have the long commit
           hash prepended to the format.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       -r, --rebase-merges[=(rebase-cousins|no-rebase-cousins)]
           By default, a rebase will simply drop merge commits from the
           todo list, and put the rebased commits into a single, linear
           branch. With --rebase-merges, the rebase will instead try to
           preserve the branching structure within the commits that are
           to be rebased, by recreating the merge commits. Any resolved
           merge conflicts or manual amendments in these merge commits
           will have to be resolved/re-applied manually.

           By default, or when no-rebase-cousins was specified, commits
           which do not have <upstream> as direct ancestor will keep
           their original branch point, i.e. commits that would be
           excluded by git-log(1)'s --ancestry-path option will keep
           their original ancestry by default. If the rebase-cousins
           mode is turned on, such commits are instead rebased onto
           <upstream> (or <onto>, if specified).

           The --rebase-merges mode is similar in spirit to the
           deprecated --preserve-merges but works with interactive
           rebases, where commits can be reordered, inserted and dropped
           at will.

           It is currently only possible to recreate the merge commits
           using the recursive merge strategy; Different merge
           strategies can be used only via explicit exec git merge -s
           <strategy> [...]  commands.


       -p, --preserve-merges
           [DEPRECATED: use --rebase-merges instead] Recreate merge
           commits instead of flattening the history by replaying
           commits a merge commit introduces. Merge conflict resolutions
           or manual amendments to merge commits are not preserved.

           This uses the --interactive machinery internally, but
           combining it with the --interactive option explicitly is
           generally not a good idea unless you know what you are doing
           (see BUGS below).

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       -x <cmd>, --exec <cmd>
           Append "exec <cmd>" after each line creating a commit in the
           final history. <cmd> will be interpreted as one or more shell
           commands. Any command that fails will interrupt the rebase,
           with exit code 1.

           You may execute several commands by either using one instance
           of --exec with several commands:

               git rebase -i --exec "cmd1 && cmd2 && ..."

           or by giving more than one --exec:

               git rebase -i --exec "cmd1" --exec "cmd2" --exec ...

           If --autosquash is used, "exec" lines will not be appended
           for the intermediate commits, and will only appear at the end
           of each squash/fixup series.

           This uses the --interactive machinery internally, but it can
           be run without an explicit --interactive.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

           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. When used with --onto, it
           will skip changes already contained in <newbase> (instead of
           <upstream>) whereas without --onto it will operate on every
           change. When used together with both --onto and
           --preserve-merges, all root commits will be rewritten to have
           <newbase> as parent instead.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       --autosquash, --no-autosquash
           When the commit log message begins with "squash! ..." or
           "fixup! ..." or "amend! ...", and there is already a commit
           in the todo list that matches 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 fixup or fixup -C respectively. A commit matches the ...
           if the commit subject matches, or if the ...  refers to the
           commit’s hash. As a fall-back, partial matches of the commit
           subject work, too. The recommended way to create
           fixup/amend/squash commits is by using the --fixup,
           --fixup=amend: or --fixup=reword: and --squash options
           respectively of git-commit(1).

           If the --autosquash option is enabled by default using the
           configuration variable rebase.autoSquash, this option can be
           used to override and disable this setting.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       --autostash, --no-autostash
           Automatically create a temporary stash entry before the
           operation begins, and apply it after the operation ends. This
           means that you can run rebase on a dirty worktree. However,
           use with care: the final stash application after a successful
           rebase might result in non-trivial conflicts.

       --reschedule-failed-exec, --no-reschedule-failed-exec
           Automatically reschedule exec commands that failed. This only
           makes sense in interactive mode (or when an --exec option was

           Even though this option applies once a rebase is started,
           it’s set for the whole rebase at the start based on either
           the rebase.rescheduleFailedExec configuration (see
           git-config(1) or "CONFIGURATION" below) or whether this
           option is provided. Otherwise an explicit
           --no-reschedule-failed-exec at the start would be overridden
           by the presence of rebase.rescheduleFailedExec=true


       The following options:

       •   --apply

       •   --whitespace

       •   -C

       are incompatible with the following options:

       •   --merge

       •   --strategy

       •   --strategy-option

       •   --allow-empty-message

       •   --[no-]autosquash

       •   --rebase-merges

       •   --preserve-merges

       •   --interactive

       •   --exec

       •   --no-keep-empty

       •   --empty=

       •   --reapply-cherry-picks

       •   --edit-todo

       •   --root when used in combination with --onto

       In addition, the following pairs of options are incompatible:

       •   --preserve-merges and --interactive

       •   --preserve-merges and --signoff

       •   --preserve-merges and --rebase-merges

       •   --preserve-merges and --empty=

       •   --preserve-merges and --ignore-whitespace

       •   --preserve-merges and --committer-date-is-author-date

       •   --preserve-merges and --ignore-date

       •   --keep-base and --onto

       •   --keep-base and --root

       •   --fork-point and --root


       git rebase has two primary backends: apply and merge. (The apply
       backend used to be known as the am backend, but the name led to
       confusion as it looks like a verb instead of a noun. Also, the
       merge backend used to be known as the interactive backend, but it
       is now used for non-interactive cases as well. Both were renamed
       based on lower-level functionality that underpinned each.) There
       are some subtle differences in how these two backends behave:

   Empty commits
       The apply backend unfortunately drops intentionally empty
       commits, i.e. commits that started empty, though these are rare
       in practice. It also drops commits that become empty and has no
       option for controlling this behavior.

       The merge backend keeps intentionally empty commits by default
       (though with -i they are marked as empty in the todo list editor,
       or they can be dropped automatically with --no-keep-empty).

       Similar to the apply backend, by default the merge backend drops
       commits that become empty unless -i/--interactive is specified
       (in which case it stops and asks the user what to do). The merge
       backend also has an --empty={drop,keep,ask} option for changing
       the behavior of handling commits that become empty.

   Directory rename detection
       Due to the lack of accurate tree information (arising from
       constructing fake ancestors with the limited information
       available in patches), directory rename detection is disabled in
       the apply backend. Disabled directory rename detection means that
       if one side of history renames a directory and the other adds new
       files to the old directory, then the new files will be left
       behind in the old directory without any warning at the time of
       rebasing that you may want to move these files into the new

       Directory rename detection works with the merge backend to
       provide you warnings in such cases.

       The apply backend works by creating a sequence of patches (by
       calling format-patch internally), and then applying the patches
       in sequence (calling am internally). Patches are composed of
       multiple hunks, each with line numbers, a context region, and the
       actual changes. The line numbers have to be taken with some fuzz,
       since the other side will likely have inserted or deleted lines
       earlier in the file. The context region is meant to help find how
       to adjust the line numbers in order to apply the changes to the
       right lines. However, if multiple areas of the code have the same
       surrounding lines of context, the wrong one can be picked. There
       are real-world cases where this has caused commits to be
       reapplied incorrectly with no conflicts reported. Setting
       diff.context to a larger value may prevent such types of
       problems, but increases the chance of spurious conflicts (since
       it will require more lines of matching context to apply).

       The merge backend works with a full copy of each relevant file,
       insulating it from these types of problems.

   Labelling of conflicts markers
       When there are content conflicts, the merge machinery tries to
       annotate each side’s conflict markers with the commits where the
       content came from. Since the apply backend drops the original
       information about the rebased commits and their parents (and
       instead generates new fake commits based off limited information
       in the generated patches), those commits cannot be identified;
       instead it has to fall back to a commit summary. Also, when
       merge.conflictStyle is set to diff3, the apply backend will use
       "constructed merge base" to label the content from the merge
       base, and thus provide no information about the merge base commit

       The merge backend works with the full commits on both sides of
       history and thus has no such limitations.

       The apply backend has not traditionally called the post-commit
       hook, while the merge backend has. Both have called the
       post-checkout hook, though the merge backend has squelched its
       output. Further, both backends only call the post-checkout hook
       with the starting point commit of the rebase, not the
       intermediate commits nor the final commit. In each case, the
       calling of these hooks was by accident of implementation rather
       than by design (both backends were originally implemented as
       shell scripts and happened to invoke other commands like git
       checkout or git commit that would call the hooks). Both backends
       should have the same behavior, though it is not entirely clear
       which, if any, is correct. We will likely make rebase stop
       calling either of these hooks in the future.

       The apply backend has safety problems with an ill-timed
       interrupt; if the user presses Ctrl-C at the wrong time to try to
       abort the rebase, the rebase can enter a state where it cannot be
       aborted with a subsequent git rebase --abort. The merge backend
       does not appear to suffer from the same shortcoming. (See for

   Commit Rewording
       When a conflict occurs while rebasing, rebase stops and asks the
       user to resolve. Since the user may need to make notable changes
       while resolving conflicts, after conflicts are resolved and the
       user has run git rebase --continue, the rebase should open an
       editor and ask the user to update the commit message. The merge
       backend does this, while the apply backend blindly applies the
       original commit message.

   Miscellaneous differences
       There are a few more behavioral differences that most folks would
       probably consider inconsequential but which are mentioned for

       •   Reflog: The two backends will use different wording when
           describing the changes made in the reflog, though both will
           make use of the word "rebase".

       •   Progress, informational, and error messages: The two backends
           provide slightly different progress and informational
           messages. Also, the apply backend writes error messages (such
           as "Your files would be overwritten...") to stdout, while the
           merge backend writes them to stderr.

       •   State directories: The two backends keep their state in
           different directories under .git/


       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 mismerges by tests done on actual
           merge commits taken from Linux 2.6 kernel development
           history. Additionally this can detect and handle merges
           involving renames, but currently cannot make use of detected
           copies. This is the default merge strategy when pulling or
           merging one branch.

           The recursive strategy can take the following options:

               This option forces conflicting hunks to be auto-resolved
               cleanly by favoring our version. Changes from the other
               tree that do not conflict with our side are reflected in
               the merge result. For a binary file, the entire contents
               are taken from our side.

               This should not be confused with the ours merge strategy,
               which does not even look at what the other tree contains
               at all. It discards everything the other tree did,
               declaring our history contains all that happened in it.

               This is the opposite of ours; note that, unlike ours,
               there is no theirs merge strategy to confuse this merge
               option with.

               With this option, merge-recursive spends a little extra
               time to avoid mismerges that sometimes occur due to
               unimportant matching lines (e.g., braces from distinct
               functions). Use this when the branches to be merged have
               diverged wildly. See also git-diff(1) --patience.

               Tells merge-recursive to use a different diff algorithm,
               which can help avoid mismerges that occur due to
               unimportant matching lines (such as braces from distinct
               functions). See also git-diff(1) --diff-algorithm.

           ignore-space-change, ignore-all-space, ignore-space-at-eol,
               Treats lines with the indicated type of whitespace change
               as unchanged for the sake of a three-way merge.
               Whitespace changes mixed with other changes to a line are
               not ignored. See also git-diff(1) -b, -w,
               --ignore-space-at-eol, and --ignore-cr-at-eol.

               •   If their version only introduces whitespace changes
                   to a line, our version is used;

               •   If our version introduces whitespace changes but
                   their version includes a substantial change, their
                   version is used;

               •   Otherwise, the merge proceeds in the usual way.

               This runs a virtual check-out and check-in of all three
               stages of a file when resolving a three-way merge. This
               option is meant to be used when merging branches with
               different clean filters or end-of-line normalization
               rules. See "Merging branches with differing
               checkin/checkout attributes" in gitattributes(5) for

               Disables the renormalize option. This overrides the
               merge.renormalize configuration variable.

               Turn off rename detection. This overrides the
               merge.renames configuration variable. See also
               git-diff(1) --no-renames.

               Turn on rename detection, optionally setting the
               similarity threshold. This is the default. This overrides
               the merge.renames configuration variable. See also
               git-diff(1) --find-renames.

               Deprecated synonym for find-renames=<n>.

               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 branch.

           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.

       With the strategies that use 3-way merge (including the default,
       recursive), if a change is made on both branches, but later
       reverted on one of the branches, that change will be present in
       the merged result; some people find this behavior confusing. It
       occurs because only the heads and the merge base are considered
       when performing a merge, not the individual commits. The merge
       algorithm therefore considers the reverted change as no change at
       all, and substitutes the changed version instead.

NOTES         top

       You should understand the implications of using git rebase on a
       repository that you share. See also RECOVERING FROM UPSTREAM
       REBASE below.

       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:

        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

       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 rebasing.

       To interrupt the rebase (just like an "edit" command would do,
       but without cherry-picking any commit first), use the "break"

       If you just want to edit the commit message for a commit, replace
       the command "pick" with the command "reword".

       To drop a commit, replace the command "pick" with "drop", or just
       delete the matching line.

       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 first commit’s message with those identified
       by "squash" commands, omitting the messages of commits identified
       by "fixup" commands, unless "fixup -c" is used. In that case the
       suggested commit message is only the message of the "fixup -c"
       commit, and an editor is opened allowing you to edit the message.
       The contents (patch) of the "fixup -c" commit are still
       incorporated into the folded commit. If there is more than one
       "fixup -c" commit, the message from the final one is used. You
       can also use "fixup -C" to get the same behavior as "fixup -c"
       except without opening an editor.

       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 resolving conflicts you can continue with git
       rebase --continue.

       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 git rebase like this:

           $ git rebase -i HEAD~5

       And move the first patch to the end of the list.

       You might want to recreate merge commits, e.g. if you have a
       history like this:


       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 -r --onto Q O

       Reordering and editing commits usually creates untested
       intermediate steps. You may want to check that your history
       editing did not break anything by running a test, or at least
       recompiling at intermediate points in history by using the "exec"
       command (shortcut "x"). You may do so by creating a todo list
       like this one:

           pick deadbee Implement feature XXX
           fixup f1a5c00 Fix to feature XXX
           exec make
           pick c0ffeee The oneline of the next commit
           edit deadbab The oneline of the commit after
           exec cd subdir; make test

       The interactive rebase will stop when a command fails (i.e. exits
       with non-0 status) to give you an opportunity to fix the problem.
       You can continue with git rebase --continue.

       The "exec" command launches the command in a shell (the one
       specified in $SHELL, or the default shell if $SHELL is not set),
       so you can use shell features (like "cd", ">", ";" ...). The
       command is run from the root of the working tree.

           $ git rebase -i --exec "make test"

       This command lets you check that intermediate commits are
       compilable. The todo list becomes like that:

           pick 5928aea one
           exec make test
           pick 04d0fda two
           exec make test
           pick ba46169 three
           exec make test
           pick f4593f9 four
           exec make test


       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


       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

       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  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

       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
           --interactive to omit, edit, squash, or fixup commits; or if
           the upstream used one of commit --amend, reset, or a full
           history rewriting command like filter-repo[2].

   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.

       In that case, the fix is easy because git rebase knows to skip
       changes that are already present in the new upstream (unless
       --reapply-cherry-picks is given). 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.

           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!

       The idea is to manually tell git rebase "where the old subsystem
       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:

       •   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

               $ 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!


       The interactive rebase command was originally designed to handle
       individual patch series. As such, it makes sense to exclude merge
       commits from the todo list, as the developer may have merged the
       then-current master while working on the branch, only to rebase
       all the commits onto master eventually (skipping the merge

       However, there are legitimate reasons why a developer may want to
       recreate merge commits: to keep the branch structure (or "commit
       topology") when working on multiple, inter-related branches.

       In the following example, the developer works on a topic branch
       that refactors the way buttons are defined, and on another topic
       branch that uses that refactoring to implement a "Report a bug"
       button. The output of git log --graph --format=%s -5 may look
       like this:

           *   Merge branch 'report-a-bug'
           | * Add the feedback button
           * | Merge branch 'refactor-button'
           |\ \
           | |/
           | * Use the Button class for all buttons
           | * Extract a generic Button class from the DownloadButton one

       The developer might want to rebase those commits to a newer
       master while keeping the branch topology, for example when the
       first topic branch is expected to be integrated into master much
       earlier than the second one, say, to resolve merge conflicts with
       changes to the DownloadButton class that made it into master.

       This rebase can be performed using the --rebase-merges option. It
       will generate a todo list looking like this:

           label onto

           # Branch: refactor-button
           reset onto
           pick 123456 Extract a generic Button class from the DownloadButton one
           pick 654321 Use the Button class for all buttons
           label refactor-button

           # Branch: report-a-bug
           reset refactor-button # Use the Button class for all buttons
           pick abcdef Add the feedback button
           label report-a-bug

           reset onto
           merge -C a1b2c3 refactor-button # Merge 'refactor-button'
           merge -C 6f5e4d report-a-bug # Merge 'report-a-bug'

       In contrast to a regular interactive rebase, there are label,
       reset and merge commands in addition to pick ones.

       The label command associates a label with the current HEAD when
       that command is executed. These labels are created as
       worktree-local refs (refs/rewritten/<label>) that will be deleted
       when the rebase finishes. That way, rebase operations in multiple
       worktrees linked to the same repository do not interfere with one
       another. If the label command fails, it is rescheduled
       immediately, with a helpful message how to proceed.

       The reset command resets the HEAD, index and worktree to the
       specified revision. It is similar to an exec git reset --hard
       <label>, but refuses to overwrite untracked files. If the reset
       command fails, it is rescheduled immediately, with a helpful
       message how to edit the todo list (this typically happens when a
       reset command was inserted into the todo list manually and
       contains a typo).

       The merge command will merge the specified revision(s) into
       whatever is HEAD at that time. With -C <original-commit>, the
       commit message of the specified merge commit will be used. When
       the -C is changed to a lower-case -c, the message will be opened
       in an editor after a successful merge so that the user can edit
       the message.

       If a merge command fails for any reason other than merge
       conflicts (i.e. when the merge operation did not even start), it
       is rescheduled immediately.

       At this time, the merge command will always use the recursive
       merge strategy for regular merges, and octopus for octopus
       merges, with no way to choose a different one. To work around
       this, an exec command can be used to call git merge explicitly,
       using the fact that the labels are worktree-local refs (the ref
       refs/rewritten/onto would correspond to the label onto, for

       Note: the first command (label onto) labels the revision onto
       which the commits are rebased; The name onto is just a
       convention, as a nod to the --onto option.

       It is also possible to introduce completely new merge commits
       from scratch by adding a command of the form merge <merge-head>.
       This form will generate a tentative commit message and always
       open an editor to let the user edit it. This can be useful e.g.
       when a topic branch turns out to address more than a single
       concern and wants to be split into two or even more topic
       branches. Consider this todo list:

           pick 192837 Switch from GNU Makefiles to CMake
           pick 5a6c7e Document the switch to CMake
           pick 918273 Fix detection of OpenSSL in CMake
           pick afbecd http: add support for TLS v1.3
           pick fdbaec Fix detection of cURL in CMake on Windows

       The one commit in this list that is not related to CMake may very
       well have been motivated by working on fixing all those bugs
       introduced by switching to CMake, but it addresses a different
       concern. To split this branch into two topic branches, the todo
       list could be edited like this:

           label onto

           pick afbecd http: add support for TLS v1.3
           label tlsv1.3

           reset onto
           pick 192837 Switch from GNU Makefiles to CMake
           pick 918273 Fix detection of OpenSSL in CMake
           pick fdbaec Fix detection of cURL in CMake on Windows
           pick 5a6c7e Document the switch to CMake
           label cmake

           reset onto
           merge tlsv1.3
           merge cmake


           Default backend to use for rebasing. Possible choices are
           apply or merge. In the future, if the merge backend gains all
           remaining capabilities of the apply backend, this setting may
           become unused.

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

           If set to true enable --autosquash option by default.

           When set to true, automatically create a temporary stash
           entry before the operation begins, and apply it after the
           operation ends. This means that you can run rebase on a dirty
           worktree. However, use with care: the final stash application
           after a successful rebase might result in non-trivial
           conflicts. This option can be overridden by the
           --no-autostash and --autostash options of git-rebase(1).
           Defaults to false.

           If set to "warn", git rebase -i will print a warning if some
           commits are removed (e.g. a line was deleted), however the
           rebase will still proceed. If set to "error", it will print
           the previous warning and stop the rebase, git rebase
           --edit-todo can then be used to correct the error. If set to
           "ignore", no checking is done. To drop a commit without
           warning or error, use the drop command in the todo list.
           Defaults to "ignore".

           A format string, as specified in git-log(1), to be used for
           the todo list during an interactive rebase. The format will
           automatically have the long commit hash prepended to the

           If set to true, git rebase will use abbreviated command names
           in the todo list resulting in something like this:

                       p deadbee The oneline of the commit
                       p fa1afe1 The oneline of the next commit

           instead of:

                       pick deadbee The oneline of the commit
                       pick fa1afe1 The oneline of the next commit

           Defaults to false.

           Automatically reschedule exec commands that failed. This only
           makes sense in interactive mode (or when an --exec option was
           provided). This is the same as specifying the
           --reschedule-failed-exec option.

           If set to false set --no-fork-point option by default.

           Text editor used by git rebase -i for editing the rebase
           instruction file. The value is meant to be interpreted by the
           shell when it is used. It can be overridden by the
           GIT_SEQUENCE_EDITOR environment variable. When not configured
           the default commit message editor is used instead.

BUGS         top

       The todo list presented by the deprecated --preserve-merges
       --interactive does not represent the topology of the revision
       graph (use --rebase-merges instead). Editing commits and
       rewording their commit messages should work fine, but attempts to
       reorder commits tend to produce counterintuitive results. Use
       --rebase-merges in such scenarios instead.

       For example, an attempt to rearrange

           1 --- 2 --- 3 --- 4 --- 5


           1 --- 2 --- 4 --- 3 --- 5

       by moving the "pick 4" line will result in the following history:

           1 --- 2 --- 4 --- 5

GIT         top

       Part of the git(1) suite

NOTES         top

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

        2. filter-repo

COLOPHON         top

       This page is part of the git (Git distributed version control
       system) project.  Information about the project can be found at
       ⟨⟩.  If you have a bug report for this manual
       page, see ⟨⟩.  This page was obtained
       from the project's upstream Git repository
       ⟨⟩ on 2021-08-27.  (At that time,
       the date of the most recent commit that was found in the
       repository was 2021-08-24.)  If you discover any rendering
       problems in this HTML version of the page, or you believe there
       is a better or more up-to-date source for the page, or you have
       corrections or improvements to the information in this COLOPHON
       (which is not part of the original manual page), send a mail to

Git         08/27/2021                  GIT-REBASE(1)

Pages that refer to this page: git(1)git-cherry(1)git-commit(1)git-config(1)git-filter-branch(1)git-format-patch(1)git-pull(1)git-rebase(1)git-replace(1)git-reset(1)git-submodule(1)git-svn(1)githooks(5)giteveryday(7)gitfaq(7)gitworkflows(7)