git-rebase manpage

Search topic Section

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

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

       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)

       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 abort.

       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

       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 "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---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 and warnings will be issued (if the merge
       backend is used). 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 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

	   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 with

	   git rebase --continue

       Alternatively, you can undo the git rebase with

	   git rebase --abort

       --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> and <branch>. Running git rebase
	   --keep-base <upstream> <branch> is equivalent to running git rebase
	   --onto <upstream>...<branch> <upstream> <branch>.

	   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

	   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

	   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 it.

	   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

	   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

	   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. When using
	   the merge backend, warnings will be issued for each dropped commit
	   (unless --quiet is given). Advice will also be issued unless
	   advice.skippedCherryPicks is set to false (see git-config(1)).

	   --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

       -m, --merge
	   Using merging strategies to rebase (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, instead of the default ort. 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 ort.
	   Note the reversal of ours and theirs as noted above for the -m

	   See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       --rerere-autoupdate, --no-rerere-autoupdate
	   After the rerere mechanism reuses a recorded resolution on the
	   current conflict to update the files in the working tree, allow it
	   to also update the index with the result of resolution.
	   --no-rerere-autoupdate is a good way to double-check what rerere
	   did and catch potential mismerges, before committing the result to
	   the index with a separate git add.

       -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

       -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).

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

	   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 commits.

	   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

	   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. See also
	   rebase.forkpoint in git-config(1).

	   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

	   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

	   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).

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


       -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.

	   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-

	   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 provided).

	   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 configuration.

       --update-refs, --no-update-refs
	   Automatically force-update any branches that point to commits that
	   are being rebased. Any branches that are checked out in a worktree
	   are not updated in this way.

	   If the configuration variable rebase.updateRefs is set, then this
	   option can be used to override and disable this setting.

       The following options:

       o   --apply

       o   --whitespace

       o   -C

       are incompatible with the following options:

       o   --merge

       o   --strategy

       o   --strategy-option

       o   --allow-empty-message

       o   --[no-]autosquash

       o   --rebase-merges

       o   --interactive

       o   --exec

       o   --no-keep-empty

       o   --empty=

       o   --reapply-cherry-picks

       o   --edit-todo

       o   --update-refs

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

       In addition, the following pairs of options are incompatible:

       o   --keep-base and --onto

       o   --keep-base and --root

       o   --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

       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.

       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 or zdiff3, 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 whatsoever.

       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
       https://lore.kernel.org/git/20200207132152.GC2868@szeder.dev/ 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

       o   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".

       o   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.

       o   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 is the default merge strategy when pulling or merging one
	   branch. This strategy 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 strategy
	   can detect and handle merges involving renames. It does not make
	   use of detected copies. The name for this algorithm is an acronym
	   ("Ostensibly Recursive's Twin") and came from the fact that it was
	   written as a replacement for the previous default algorithm,

	   The ort 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.

	   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

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

	       o   If our version introduces whitespace changes but their
		   version includes a substantial change, their version is

	       o   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 details.

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

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

	       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 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. It does not make use of detected
	   copies. This was the default strategy for resolving two heads from
	   Git v0.99.9k until v2.33.0.

	   The recursive strategy takes the same options as ort. However,
	   there are three additional options that ort ignores (not documented
	   above) that are potentially useful with the recursive strategy:

	       Deprecated synonym for diff-algorithm=patience.

	       Use a different diff algorithm while merging, 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. Note that ort specifically uses
	       diff-algorithm=histogram, while recursive defaults to the
	       diff.algorithm config setting.

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

	   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. It does
	   not handle renames.

	   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 ort 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, ort),
       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.

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

       When the rebase 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

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

       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:

       o   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.

       o   Mark the commit you want to split with the action "edit".

       o   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.

       o   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.

       o   Commit the now-current index with whatever commit message is
	   appropriate now.

       o   Repeat the last two steps until your working tree is clean.

       o   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.

       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 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 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

       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

	       $ 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:

       o   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).)

       o   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

       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 commits).

       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

       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

       By default, the merge command will use the ort merge strategy for
       regular merges, and octopus for octopus merges. One can specify a
       default strategy for all merges using the --strategy argument when
       invoking rebase, or can override specific merges in the interactive
       list of commands by using an exec command to call git merge explicitly
       with a --strategy argument. Note that when calling git merge explicitly
       like this, you can make use of the fact that the labels are
       worktree-local refs (the ref refs/rewritten/onto would correspond to
       the label onto, for example) in order to refer to the branches you want
       to merge.

       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

	   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

       Everything below this line in this section is selectively included from
       the git-config(1) documentation. The content is the same as what's
       found there:

	   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 true enable --update-refs option by default.

	   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 format.

	   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.

       Part of the git(1) suite

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

	2. filter-repo

Git 2.38.4			  05/16/2024			 GIT-REBASE(1)