SYNOPSIS
git merge-base [-a|--all] <commit> <commit>… git merge-base [-a|--all] --octopus <commit>… git merge-base --is-ancestor <commit> <commit> git merge-base --independent <commit>… git merge-base --fork-point <ref> [<commit>]
DESCRIPTION
git merge-base finds best common ancestor(s) between two commits to use in a three-way merge. One common ancestor is better than another common ancestor if the latter is an ancestor of the former. A common ancestor that does not have any better common ancestor is a best common ancestor, i.e. a merge base. Note that there can be more than one merge base for a pair of commits.
OPERATION MODES
As the most common special case, specifying only two commits on the command line means computing the merge base between the given two commits.
More generally, among the two commits to compute the merge base from, one is specified by the first commit argument on the command line; the other commit is a (possibly hypothetical) commit that is a merge across all the remaining commits on the command line.
As a consequence, the merge base is not necessarily
contained in each of the commit arguments if more than two commits
are specified. This is different from
git-show-branch(1) when used
with the --merge-base
option.
- --octopus
-
Compute the best common ancestors of all supplied commits, in preparation for an n-way merge. This mimics the behavior of git show-branch --merge-base.
- --independent
-
Instead of printing merge bases, print a minimal subset of the supplied commits with the same ancestors. In other words, among the commits given, list those which cannot be reached from any other. This mimics the behavior of git show-branch --independent.
- --is-ancestor
-
Check if the first <commit> is an ancestor of the second <commit>, and exit with status 0 if true, or with status 1 if not. Errors are signaled by a non-zero status that is not 1.
- --fork-point
-
Find the point at which a branch (or any history that leads to <commit>) forked from another branch (or any reference) <ref>. This does not just look for the common ancestor of the two commits, but also takes into account the reflog of <ref> to see if the history leading to <commit> forked from an earlier incarnation of the branch <ref> (see discussion on this mode below).
OPTIONS
- -a
- --all
-
Output all merge bases for the commits, instead of just one.
DISCUSSION
Given two commits A and B,
git merge-base A B
will output a commit which is
reachable from both A and B through the parent
relationship.
For example, with this topology:
o---o---o---B / ---o---1---o---o---o---A
the merge base between A and B is 1.
Given three commits A, B and C,
git merge-base A B C
will compute the merge base
between A and a hypothetical commit M, which is
a merge between B and C. For example, with this
topology:
o---o---o---o---C / / o---o---o---B / / ---2---1---o---o---o---A
the result of git merge-base A B C
is 1.
This is because the equivalent topology with a merge commit
M between B and C is:
o---o---o---o---o / \ / o---o---o---o---M / / ---2---1---o---o---o---A
and the result of git merge-base A M
is 1.
Commit 2 is also a common ancestor between A and
M, but 1 is a better common ancestor, because
2 is an ancestor of 1. Hence, 2 is not
a merge base.
The result of git merge-base --octopus A B C
is
2, because 2 is the best common ancestor of all
commits.
When the history involves criss-cross merges, there can be more than one best common ancestor for two commits. For example, with this topology:
---1---o---A \ / X / \ ---2---o---o---B
both 1 and 2 are merge-bases of A and B. Neither
one is better than the other (both are best merge bases).
When the --all
option is not given, it is unspecified
which best one is output.
A common idiom to check "fast-forward-ness" between two commits A and B is (or at least used to be) to compute the merge base between A and B, and check if it is the same as A, in which case, A is an ancestor of B. You will see this idiom used often in older scripts.
A=$(git rev-parse --verify A) if test "$A" = "$(git merge-base A B)" then ... A is an ancestor of B ... fi
In modern git, you can say this in a more direct way:
if git merge-base --is-ancestor A B then ... A is an ancestor of B ... fi
instead.
Discussion on fork-point mode
After working on the topic
branch created with
git switch -c topic origin/master
, the history of
remote-tracking branch origin/master
may have been
rewound and rebuilt, leading to a history of this shape:
o---B2 / ---o---o---B1--o---o---o---B (origin/master) \ B0 \ D0---D1---D (topic)
where origin/master
used to point at commits B0, B1,
B2 and now it points at B, and your topic
branch was
started on top of it back when origin/master
was at
B0, and you built three commits, D0, D1, and D, on top of it.
Imagine that you now want to rebase the work you did on the topic
on top of the updated origin/master.
In such a case,
git merge-base origin/master topic
would return the
parent of B0 in the above picture, but B0^..D is
not the range of commits you would want to replay
on top of B (it includes B0, which is not what you wrote; it is a
commit the other side discarded when it moved its tip from B0 to
B1).
git merge-base --fork-point origin/master topic
is
designed to help in such a case. It takes not only B but also B0,
B1, and B2 (i.e. old tips of the remote-tracking branches your
repository’s reflog knows about) into account to see on
which commit your topic branch was built and finds B0, allowing
you to replay only the commits on your topic, excluding the
commits the other side later discarded.
Hence
$ fork_point=$(git merge-base --fork-point origin/master topic)
will find B0, and
$ git rebase --onto origin/master $fork_point topic
will replay D0, D1 and D on top of B to create a new history of this shape:
o---B2 / ---o---o---B1--o---o---o---B (origin/master) \ \ B0 D0'--D1'--D' (topic - updated) \ D0---D1---D (topic - old)
A caveat is that older reflog entries in your repository may be
expired by git gc
. If B0 no longer appears in the
reflog of the remote-tracking branch origin/master
,
the --fork-point
mode obviously cannot find it and
fails, avoiding to give a random and useless result (such as the
parent of B0, like the same command without the
--fork-point
option gives).
Also, the remote-tracking branch you use the
--fork-point
mode with must be the one your topic
forked from its tip. If you forked from an older commit than the
tip, this mode would not find the fork point (imagine in the above
sample history B0 did not exist, origin/master started at B1,
moved to B2 and then B, and you forked your topic at
origin/master^ when origin/master was B1; the shape of the history
would be the same as above, without B0, and the parent of B1 is
what git merge-base origin/master topic
correctly
finds, but the --fork-point
mode will not, because it
is not one of the commits that used to be at the tip of
origin/master).
See also
GIT
Part of the git(1) suite