Resolve Git merge conflicts in favor of their changes during a pull

Question

How do I resolve a git merge conflict in favor of pulled changes    Basically I need to remove all conflicting changes from a working tree without having to go through all of the conflicts with a git mergetool while keeping all conflict-free changes  Preferably doing this while pulling  not afterwards

User · Answer

The git pull -X theirs answers may create an ugly merge commit  or issue an     error  Your local changes to the following files would be overwritten by merge    If you want to simply ignore any local modifications to files from the repo  for example on a client that should always be a mirror of an origin  run this  replace master with the branch you want    git fetch  amp  amp  git reset --hard origin master   How does it work  git fetch does git pull but without merge  Then git reset --hard makes your working tree match the last commit  All of your local changes to files in the repo will be discarded  but new local files will be left alone

User · Answer

To resolve all conflicts with the version in a particular branch   git diff --name-only --diff-filter U   xargs git checkout   branchName    So  if you are already in the merging state  and you want to keep the master version of the conflicting files    git diff --name-only --diff-filter U   xargs git checkout master

User · Answer

git pull -s recursive -X theirs  lt remoterepo or other repo gt    Or  simply  for the default repository   git pull -X theirs   If you re already in conflicted state     git checkout --theirs path to file

User · Answer

OK so  picture the scenario I was just in   You attempt a merge  or maybe a cherry-pick  and you re stopped with    git cherry-pick 1023e24 error  could not apply 1023e24     Commit Message  hint  after resolving the conflicts  mark the corrected paths hint  with  git add  lt paths gt   or  git rm  lt paths gt   hint  and commit the result with  git commit    Now  you view the conflicted file and you really don t want to keep your changes  In my case above  the file was conflicted on just a newline my IDE had auto-added  To undo your changes and accept their s  the easiest way is   git checkout --theirs path to the conflicted file php git add path to the conflicted file php   The converse of this  to overwrite the incoming version with your version  is  git checkout --ours path to the conflicted file php git add path to the conflicted file php   Surprisingly  I couldn t find this answer very easily on the Net

User · Answer

If you re already in conflicted state  and do not want to checkout path one by one  You may try  git merge --abort git pull -X theirs

User · Answer

VS Code  integrated Git  IDE Users   If you want to accept all the incoming changes in the conflict file then do the following steps   1  Go to command palette - Ctrl   Shift   P 2  Select the option - Merge Conflict  Accept All Incoming   Similarly you can do for other options like Accept All Both  Accept All Current etc

User · Answer

Please not that sometimes this will not work      git checkout --ours path to file   or      git checkout --theirs path to file   I did this instead  assuming HEAD is ours and MERGE HEAD is theirs  git checkout HEAD -- path to file   or   git checkout MERGE HEAD -- path to file   After we do this and we are good   git add     If you want to understand more  see wonderful post of torek here    git checkout --ours does not remove files from unmerged files list

User · Answer

from https   git-scm com book en v2 Git-Tools-Advanced-Merging      This will basically do a fake merge  It will record a new merge commit   with both branches as parents  but it will not even look at the branch   you   re merging in  It will simply record as the result of the merge   the exact code in your current branch     git merge -s ours mundo       Merge made by the  ours  strategy     git diff HEAD HEAD        You can see that there is no difference between the branch we were on   and the result of the merge       This can often be useful to basically trick Git into thinking that a   branch is already merged when doing a merge later on  For example  say   you branched off a release branch and have done some work on it that   you will want to merge back into your master branch at some point  In   the meantime some bugfix on master needs to be backported into your   release branch  You can merge the bugfix branch into the release   branch and also merge -s ours the same branch into your master branch    even though the fix is already there  so when you later merge the   release branch again  there are no conflicts from the bugfix    A situation I ve found to be useful if I want master to reflect the changes of a new topic branch  I ve noticed that -Xtheirs doesn t merge without conflicts in some circumstances    e g     git merge -Xtheirs topicFoo   CONFLICT  modify delete   js search js deleted in HEAD and modified in topicFoo  Version topicFoo of js search js left in tree    In this case the solution I found was    git checkout topicFoo   from topicFoo  first merge in master using the -s ours strategy  this will create the fake commit that is just the state of topicFoo    git merge -s ours master   check the created merge commit    git log   now checkout the master branch    git checkout master   merge the topic branch back but this time use the -Xtheirs recursive strategy  this will now present you with a master branch with the state of topicFoo     git merge -X theirs topicFoo

User · Answer

You can use the recursive  quot theirs quot  strategy option  git merge --strategy-option theirs From the man  ours     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 to the merge result       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   theirs     This is opposite of ours   Note  as the man page says  the  quot ours quot  merge strategy-option is very different from the  quot ours quot  merge strategy

User · Answer

After git merge  if you get conflicts and you want either your or their  git checkout --theirs   git checkout --ours

User · Answer

If you re already in conflicted state  and you want to just accept all of theirs   git checkout --theirs   git add     If you want to do the opposite   git checkout --ours   git add     This is pretty drastic  so make sure you really want to wipe everything out like this before doing it

User · Answer

I had a long-running next-version branch with tons of deletions to files that had changed on develop  files that had been added in different places on both branches  etc    I wanted to take the entire contents of the next-version branch into develop  all in one whopping merge commit   The combination of the above commands that worked for me was   git merge -X theirs next-version   lots of files left that were modified on develop but deleted on next-version git checkout next-version     files removed  now add the deletions to the commit git add     still have files that were added on develop  in my case they are all in web  git rm -r web   Not a new answer  just combining bits from many answers  partly to reassure that you might need all of these answers

[git] Resolve Git merge conflicts in favor of their changes during a pull

Examples related to git

Examples related to git-merge

Examples related to git-merge-conflict