git rebase 命令参数

1,rebase命令介绍

  rebase 主要作用如其名:重新设置基点到指定位置。此外还可以结合squash操作进行提交记录压缩,选取连续到提交记录转移到指定分支。

2,rebase官方参数

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

SSYYNNOOPPSSIISS
       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)


DDEESSCCRRIIPPTTIIOONN
       If <branch> is specified, git rebase will perform an automatic ggiitt
       sswwiittcchh <<bbrraanncchh>> 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
       ggiitt--ccoonnffiigg(1) for details) and the ----ffoorrkk--ppooiinntt 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 ggiitt lloogg <<uuppssttrreeaamm>>....HHEEAADD; or by ggiitt lloogg
       ''ffoorrkk__ppooiinntt''....HHEEAADD, if ----ffoorrkk--ppooiinntt is active (see the description on
       ----ffoorrkk--ppooiinntt below); or by ggiitt lloogg HHEEAADD, if the ----rroooott 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 ggiitt rreesseett ----hhaarrdd
       <<uuppssttrreeaamm>> (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 ggiitt rreebbaassee ----ccoonnttiinnuuee. Another option is to bypass the
       commit that caused the merge failure with ggiitt rreebbaassee ----sskkiipp. To check
       out the original <branch> and remove the .git/rebase-apply working
       files, use the command ggiitt rreebbaassee ----aabboorrtt 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


       NNOOTTEE:: The latter form is just a short-hand of ggiitt cchheecckkoouutt ttooppiicc
       followed by ggiitt rreebbaassee mmaasstteerr. When rebase exits ttooppiicc 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 ggiitt rreebbaassee mmaasstteerr on the
       following history (in which AA'' and AA 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 rreebbaassee ----oonnttoo.

       First let's assume your _t_o_p_i_c is based on branch _n_e_x_t. For example, a
       feature developed in _t_o_p_i_c depends on some functionality which is found
       in _n_e_x_t.

               o---o---o---o---o  master
                    \
                     o---o---o---o---o  next
                                      \
                                       o---o---o  topic


       We want to make _t_o_p_i_c forked from branch _m_a_s_t_e_r; for example, because
       the functionality on which _t_o_p_i_c depends was merged into the more
       stable _m_a_s_t_e_r 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 _g_i_t _d_i_f_f 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

OOPPTTIIOONNSS
       --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.

       --keep-base
           Set the starting point at which to create the new commits to the
           merge base of <upstream> <branch>. Running git rebase _-_-_k_e_e_p_-_b_a_s_e
           _<_u_p_s_t_r_e_a_m_> _<_b_r_a_n_c_h_> is equivalent to running git rebase _-_-_o_n_t_o
           _<_u_p_s_t_r_e_a_m_>_._._. _<_u_p_s_t_r_e_a_m_>.

           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 _s_t_a_r_t_i_n_g _p_o_i_n_t on which new commits will be created, whereas
           --fork-point uses the merge base to determine the _s_e_t _o_f _c_o_m_m_i_t_s
           which will be rebased.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       <upstream>
           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.

       <branch>
           Working branch; defaults to HEAD.

       --continue
           Restart the rebasing process after having resolved a merge
           conflict.

       --abort
           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.

       --quit
           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.

       --apply
           Use applying strategies to rebase (calling ggiitt--aamm 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.

       --empty={drop,keep,ask}
           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 ggiitt lloogg ----cchheerrrryy--mmaarrkk ......) 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 ggiitt ccoommmmiitt,
           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
           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 ----eemmppttyy
           flag.)

           By default (or if ----nnoo--rreeaappppllyy--cchheerrrryy--ppiicckkss 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.

           ----rreeaappppllyy--cchheerrrryy--ppiicckkss allows rebase to forgo reading all upstream
           commits, potentially improving performance.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       --allow-empty-message
           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.

       --skip
           Restart the rebasing process by skipping the current patch.

       --edit-todo
           Edit the todo list during an interactive rebase.

       --show-current-patch
           Show the current patch in an interactive rebase or when rebase is
           stopped because of conflicts. This is the equivalent of ggiitt sshhooww
           RREEBBAASSEE__HHEEAADD.

       -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 _o_u_r_s is the
           so-far rebased series, starting with <upstream>, and _t_h_e_i_r_s 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 --ss option _g_i_t
           _m_e_r_g_e_-_r_e_c_u_r_s_i_v_e 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
           _o_u_r_s 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 ----mmeerrggee and, if no strategy has been specified, --ss
           rreeccuurrssiivvee. Note the reversal of _o_u_r_s and _t_h_e_i_r_s as noted above for
           the --mm 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 kkeeyyiidd argument is optional and defaults to
           the committer identity; if specified, it must be stuck to the
           option without a space.  ----nnoo--ggppgg--ssiiggnn is useful to countermand
           both ccoommmmiitt..ggppggSSiiggnn configuration variable, and earlier ----ggppgg--ssiiggnn.

       -q, --quiet
           Be quiet. Implies --no-stat.

       -v, --verbose
           Be verbose. Implies --stat.

       --stat
           Show a diffstat of what changed upstream since the last rebase. The
           diffstat is also controlled by the configuration option
           rebase.stat.

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

       --no-verify
           This option bypasses the pre-rebase hook. See also ggiitthhooookkss(5).

       --verify
           Allows the pre-rebase hook to run, which is the default. This
           option can be used to override --no-verify. See also ggiitthhooookkss(5).

       -C<n>
           Ensure at least <n> lines of surrounding context match before and
           after each change. When fewer lines of surrounding context exist
           they all must match. By default no context is ever ignored. 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 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 rreevveerrtt--aa--ffaauullttyy--mmeerrggee HHooww--TToo[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, _f_o_r_k___p_o_i_n_t will be used instead of
           <upstream> to calculate the set of commits to rebase, where
           _f_o_r_k___p_o_i_n_t is the result of ggiitt mmeerrggee--bbaassee ----ffoorrkk--ppooiinntt <<uuppssttrreeaamm>>
           <<bbrraanncchh>> command (see ggiitt--mmeerrggee--bbaassee(1)). If _f_o_r_k___p_o_i_n_t ends up
           being empty, the <upstream> will be used as a fallback.

           If <upstream> is given on the command line, then the default is
           ----nnoo--ffoorrkk--ppooiinntt, otherwise the default is ----ffoorrkk--ppooiinntt.

           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 ----kkeeeepp--bbaassee in order to drop those commits from
           your branch.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       --ignore-whitespace
           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.

       --whitespace=<option>
           This flag is passed to the _g_i_t _a_p_p_l_y program (see ggiitt--aappppllyy(1))
           that applies the patch. Implies --apply.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       --committer-date-is-author-date
           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 ----ffoorrccee--rreebbaassee.

       --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 ----ffoorrccee--rreebbaassee.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       --signoff
           Add a SSiiggnneedd--ooffff--bbyy trailer to all the rebased commits. Note that
           if ----iinntteerraaccttiivvee 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 ----rreebbaassee--mmeerrggeess, 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 nnoo--rreebbaassee--ccoouussiinnss was specified, commits which
           do not have <<uuppssttrreeaamm>> as direct ancestor will keep their original
           branch point, i.e. commits that would be excluded by ggiitt--lloogg(1)'s
           ----aanncceessttrryy--ppaatthh option will keep their original ancestry by
           default. If the rreebbaassee--ccoouussiinnss mode is turned on, such commits are
           instead rebased onto <<uuppssttrreeaamm>> (or <<oonnttoo>>, if specified).

           The ----rreebbaassee--mmeerrggeess mode is similar in spirit to the deprecated
           ----pprreesseerrvvee--mmeerrggeess 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 rreeccuurrssiivvee merge strategy; Different merge strategies can be
           used only via explicit eexxeecc ggiitt mmeerrggee --ss <<ssttrraatteeggyy>> [[......]]
           commands.

           See also REBASING MERGES and INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       -p, --preserve-merges
           [DEPRECATED: use ----rreebbaassee--mmeerrggeess 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 ----iinntteerraaccttiivvee machinery internally, but combining it
           with the ----iinntteerraaccttiivvee 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
           ----eexxeecc with several commands:

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

           or by giving more than one ----eexxeecc:

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

           If ----aauuttoossqquuaasshh 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 ----iinntteerraaccttiivvee machinery internally, but it can be run
           without an explicit ----iinntteerraaccttiivvee.

           See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.

       --root
           Rebase all commits reachable from <branch>, instead of limiting
           them with an <upstream>. This allows you to rebase the root
           commit(s) on a branch. 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, _a_l_l 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 rreebbaassee --ii, so that the commit marked for squashing comes right
           after the commit to be modified, and change the action of the moved
           commit from ppiicckk to ssqquuaasshh or ffiixxuupp or ffiixxuupp --CC 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 ----ffiixxuupp, ----ffiixxuupp==aammeenndd::
           or ----ffiixxuupp==rreewwoorrdd:: and ----ssqquuaasshh options respectively of ggiitt--
           ccoommmmiitt(1).

           If the ----aauuttoossqquuaasshh option is enabled by default using the
           configuration variable rreebbaassee..aauuttooSSqquuaasshh, 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 eexxeecc commands that failed. This only makes
           sense in interactive mode (or when an ----eexxeecc 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
           rreebbaassee..rreesscchheedduulleeFFaaiilleeddEExxeecc configuration (see ggiitt--ccoonnffiigg(1) or
           "CONFIGURATION" below) or whether this option is provided.
           Otherwise an explicit ----nnoo--rreesscchheedduullee--ffaaiilleedd--eexxeecc at the start
           would be overridden by the presence of
           rreebbaassee..rreesscchheedduulleeFFaaiilleeddEExxeecc==ttrruuee configuration.

IINNCCOOMMPPAATTIIBBLLEE OOPPTTIIOONNSS
       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   --preserve-merges

       +o   --interactive

       +o   --exec

       +o   --no-keep-empty

       +o   --empty=

       +o   --reapply-cherry-picks

       +o   --edit-todo

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

       In addition, the following pairs of options are incompatible:

       +o   --preserve-merges and --interactive

       +o   --preserve-merges and --signoff

       +o   --preserve-merges and --rebase-merges

       +o   --preserve-merges and --empty=

       +o   --preserve-merges and --ignore-whitespace

       +o   --preserve-merges and --committer-date-is-author-date

       +o   --preserve-merges and --ignore-date

       +o   --keep-base and --onto

       +o   --keep-base and --root

       +o   --fork-point and --root

BBEEHHAAVVIIOORRAALL DDIIFFFFEERREENNCCEESS
       git rebase has two primary backends: apply and merge. (The apply
       backend used to be known as the _a_m 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:

   EEmmppttyy ccoommmmiittss
       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.

   DDiirreeccttoorryy rreennaammee ddeetteeccttiioonn
       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.

   CCoonntteexxtt
       The apply backend works by creating a sequence of patches (by calling
       ffoorrmmaatt--ppaattcchh internally), and then applying the patches in sequence
       (calling aamm 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.

   LLaabbeelllliinngg ooff ccoonnfflliiccttss mmaarrkkeerrss
       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
       whatsoever.

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

   HHooookkss
       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
       _g_i_t _c_h_e_c_k_o_u_t or _g_i_t _c_o_m_m_i_t 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.

   IInntteerrrruuppttaabbiilliittyy
       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 ggiitt rreebbaassee ----aabboorrtt. The merge backend does not appear to
       suffer from the same shortcoming. (See
       hhttttppss::////lloorree..kkeerrnneell..oorrgg//ggiitt//2200220000220077113322115522..GGCC22886688@@sszzeeddeerr..ddeevv// for
       details.)

   CCoommmmiitt RReewwoorrddiinngg
       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
       ggiitt rreebbaassee ----ccoonnttiinnuuee, 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.

   MMiisscceellllaanneeoouuss ddiiffffeerreenncceess
       There are a few more behavioral differences that most folks would
       probably consider inconsequential but which are mentioned for
       completeness:

       +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/

MMEERRGGEE SSTTRRAATTEEGGIIEESS
       The merge mechanism (ggiitt mmeerrggee and ggiitt ppuullll commands) allows the
       backend _m_e_r_g_e _s_t_r_a_t_e_g_i_e_s to be chosen with --ss option. Some strategies
       can also take their own options, which can be passed by giving
       --XX<<ooppttiioonn>> arguments to ggiitt mmeerrggee and/or ggiitt ppuullll.

       resolve
           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.

       recursive
           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 _r_e_c_u_r_s_i_v_e strategy can take the following options:

           ours
               This option forces conflicting hunks to be auto-resolved
               cleanly by favoring _o_u_r 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 _o_u_r_s merge strategy, which
               does not even look at what the other tree contains at all. It
               discards everything the other tree did, declaring _o_u_r history
               contains all that happened in it.

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

           patience
               With this option, _m_e_r_g_e_-_r_e_c_u_r_s_i_v_e 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
               ggiitt--ddiiffff(1) ----ppaattiieennccee.

           diff-algorithm=[patience|minimal|histogram|myers]
               Tells _m_e_r_g_e_-_r_e_c_u_r_s_i_v_e 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 ggiitt--
               ddiiffff(1) ----ddiiffff--aallggoorriitthhmm.

           ignore-space-change, ignore-all-space, ignore-space-at-eol,
           ignore-cr-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
               ggiitt--ddiiffff(1) --bb, --ww, ----iiggnnoorree--ssppaaccee--aatt--eeooll, and
               ----iiggnnoorree--ccrr--aatt--eeooll.

               +o   If _t_h_e_i_r version only introduces whitespace changes to a
                   line, _o_u_r version is used;

               +o   If _o_u_r version introduces whitespace changes but _t_h_e_i_r
                   version includes a substantial change, _t_h_e_i_r version is
                   used;

               +o   Otherwise, the merge proceeds in the usual way.

           renormalize
               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
               ggiittaattttrriibbuutteess(5) for details.

           no-renormalize
               Disables the rreennoorrmmaalliizzee option. This overrides the
               mmeerrggee..rreennoorrmmaalliizzee configuration variable.

           no-renames
               Turn off rename detection. This overrides the mmeerrggee..rreennaammeess
               configuration variable. See also ggiitt--ddiiffff(1) ----nnoo--rreennaammeess.

           find-renames[=<n>]
               Turn on rename detection, optionally setting the similarity
               threshold. This is the default. This overrides the
               _m_e_r_g_e_._r_e_n_a_m_e_s configuration variable. See also ggiitt--ddiiffff(1)
               ----ffiinndd--rreennaammeess.

           rename-threshold=<n>
               Deprecated synonym for ffiinndd--rreennaammeess==<<nn>>.

           subtree[=<path>]
               This option is a more advanced form of _s_u_b_t_r_e_e 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.

       octopus
           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.

       ours
           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 _r_e_c_u_r_s_i_v_e
           merge strategy.

       subtree
           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,
       _r_e_c_u_r_s_i_v_e), 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.

NNOOTTEESS
       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.

IINNTTEERRAACCTTIIVVEE MMOODDEE
       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" 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 ggiitt rreebbaassee ----ccoonnttiinnuuee.

       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 _g_i_t
       _r_e_b_a_s_e 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:

                      X
                       \
                    A---M---B
                   /
           ---o---O---P---Q


       Suppose you want to rebase the side branch starting at "A" to "Q". Make
       sure that the current HEAD is "B", and call

           $ git rebase -i -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 ggiitt rreebbaassee ----ccoonnttiinnuuee.

       The "exec" command launches the command in a shell (the one specified
       in $$SSHHEELLLL, or the default shell if $$SSHHEELLLL 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


SSPPLLIITTTTIINNGG CCOOMMMMIITTSS
       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 ggiitt rreebbaassee --ii <<ccoommmmiitt>>^^, 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 ggiitt rreesseett HHEEAADD^^. 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 ggiitt aadddd (possibly interactively) or _g_i_t _g_u_i (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 ggiitt rreebbaassee ----ccoonnttiinnuuee.

       If you are not absolutely sure that the intermediate revisions are
       consistent (they compile, pass the testsuite, etc.) you should use _g_i_t
       _s_t_a_s_h to stash away the not-yet-committed changes after each commit,
       test, and amend the commit if fixes are necessary.

RREECCOOVVEERRIINNGG FFRROOMM UUPPSSTTRREEAAMM RREEBBAASSEE
       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
       _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m branch, and you are working on a _t_o_p_i_c that is dependent on
       this _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m. 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 _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m is rebased against _m_a_s_t_e_r, 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 _t_o_p_i_c to
       _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m, the commits from _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m 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 _t_o_p_i_c to the new _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m tip, i.e., rebase
       _t_o_p_i_c. This becomes a ripple effect: anyone downstream from _t_o_p_i_c 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 _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m rebase was a simple rebase and had no
           conflicts.

       Hard case: The changes are not the same.
           This happens if the _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m rebase had conflicts, or used
           ----iinntteerraaccttiivvee to omit, edit, squash, or fixup commits; or if the
           upstream used one of ccoommmmiitt ----aammeenndd, rreesseett, or a full history
           rewriting command like ffiilltteerr--rreeppoo[2].

   TThhee eeaassyy ccaassee
       Only works if the changes (patch IDs based on the diff contents) on
       _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m are literally the same before and after the rebase _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m
       did.

       In that case, the fix is easy because git rebase knows to skip changes
       that are already present in the new upstream (unless
       ----rreeaappppllyy--cchheerrrryy--ppiicckkss is given). So if you say (assuming you're on
       _t_o_p_i_c)

               $ 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


   TThhee hhaarrdd ccaassee
       Things get more complicated if the _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m changes do not exactly
       correspond to the ones before the rebase.

           NNoottee
           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 ggiitt rreebbaassee ----iinntteerraaccttiivvee
           will be rreessuurrrreecctteedd!

       The idea is to manually tell git rebase "where the old _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m ended
       and your _t_o_p_i_c 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
       _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m, for example:

       +o   With the _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m reflog: after _g_i_t _f_e_t_c_h, the old tip of
           _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m is at ssuubbssyysstteemm@@{{11}}. Subsequent fetches will increase the
           number. (See ggiitt--rreefflloogg(1).)

       +o   Relative to the tip of _t_o_p_i_c: knowing that your _t_o_p_i_c has three
           commits, the old tip of _s_u_b_s_y_s_t_e_m must be ttooppiicc~~33.

       You can then transplant the old ssuubbssyysstteemm....ttooppiicc to the new tip by
       saying (for the reflog case, and assuming you are on _t_o_p_i_c already):

               $ git rebase --onto subsystem subsystem@{1}


       The ripple effect of a "hard case" recovery is especially bad: _e_v_e_r_y_o_n_e
       downstream from _t_o_p_i_c will now have to perform a "hard case" recovery
       too!

RREEBBAASSIINNGG MMEERRGGEESS
       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 mmaasstteerr while working on the branch, only to rebase all the
       commits onto mmaasstteerr 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 ggiitt lloogg ----ggrraapphh ----ffoorrmmaatt==%%ss --55 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 mmaasstteerr
       while keeping the branch topology, for example when the first topic
       branch is expected to be integrated into mmaasstteerr much earlier than the
       second one, say, to resolve merge conflicts with changes to the
       DownloadButton class that made it into mmaasstteerr.

       This rebase can be performed using the ----rreebbaassee--mmeerrggeess 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 llaabbeell, rreesseett and
       mmeerrggee commands in addition to ppiicckk ones.

       The llaabbeell command associates a label with the current HEAD when that
       command is executed. These labels are created as worktree-local refs
       (rreeffss//rreewwrriitttteenn//<<llaabbeell>>) 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 llaabbeell command
       fails, it is rescheduled immediately, with a helpful message how to
       proceed.

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

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

       If a mmeerrggee 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 mmeerrggee command will aallwwaayyss use the rreeccuurrssiivvee merge
       strategy for regular merges, and ooccttooppuuss for octopus merges, with no
       way to choose a different one. To work around this, an eexxeecc command can
       be used to call ggiitt mmeerrggee explicitly, using the fact that the labels
       are worktree-local refs (the ref rreeffss//rreewwrriitttteenn//oonnttoo would correspond
       to the label oonnttoo, for example).

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

       It is also possible to introduce completely new merge commits from
       scratch by adding a command of the form mmeerrggee <<mmeerrggee--hheeaadd>>. 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


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

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

       rebase.autoSquash
           If set to true enable ----a auuttoossqquuaasshh option by default.

       rebase.autoStash
           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 ----nnoo--aauuttoossttaasshh and ----aauuttoossttaasshh options of ggiitt--
           rreebbaassee(1). Defaults to false.

       rebase.missingCommitsCheck
           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 _-_-_e_d_i_t_-_t_o_d_o 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 ddrroopp command in
           the todo list. Defaults to "ignore".

       rebase.instructionFormat
           A format string, as specified in ggiitt--lloogg(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.

       rebase.abbreviateCommands
           If set to true, ggiitt rreebbaassee 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.

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

       rebase.forkPoint
           If set to false set ----nnoo--ffoorrkk--ppooiinntt option by default.

       sequence.editor
           Text editor used by ggiitt rreebbaassee --ii 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 GGIITT__SSEEQQUUEENNCCEE__EEDDIITTOORR
           environment variable. When not configured the default commit
           message editor is used instead.

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

       For example, an attempt to rearrange

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


       to

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


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

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


GGIITT
       Part of the ggiitt(1) suite

NNOOTTEESS
        1. revert-a-faulty-merge How-To
           git-htmldocs/howto/revert-a-faulty-merge.html

        2. ffiilltteerr--rreeppoo
           https://github.com/newren/git-filter-repo



Git 2.32.0                        06/06/2021                     GIT-REBASE(1)

 

上一篇:apache-httpd – 在剧本中使用Ansible-Galaxy角色而不是在剧本中使用ansible-modules是最佳做法吗?


下一篇:POD基础知识