Git – What’s the difference between git reset –mixed, –soft, and –hard

gitversion control

I'm looking to split a commit up and not sure which reset option to use.

I was looking at the page In plain English, what does "git reset" do?, but I realized I don't really understand what the git index or staging area is and thus the explanations didn't help.

Also, the use cases for --mixed and --soft look the same to me in that answer (when you want to fix and recommit). Can someone break it down even more? I realize --mixed is probably the option to go with, but I want to know why. Lastly, what about --hard?

Can someone give me a workflow example of how selecting the 3 options would happen?

Best Answer

When you modify a file in your repository, the change is initially unstaged. In order to commit it, you must stage it—that is, add it to the index—using git add. When you make a commit, the changes that are committed are those that have been added to the index.

git reset changes, at minimum, where the current branch (HEAD) is pointing. The difference between --mixed and --soft is whether or not your index is also modified. So, if we're on branch master with this series of commits:

- A - B - C (master)

HEADpoints to C and the index matches C.

When we run git reset --soft B, master (and thus HEAD) now points to B, but the index still has the changes from C; git status will show them as staged. So if we run git commit at this point, we'll get a new commit with the same changes as C.

Okay, so starting from here again:

- A - B - C (master)

Now let's do git reset --mixed B. (Note: --mixed is the default option). Once again, master and HEAD point to B, but this time the index is also modified to match B. If we run git commit at this point, nothing will happen since the index matches HEAD. We still have the changes in the working directory, but since they're not in the index, git status shows them as unstaged. To commit them, you would git add and then commit as usual.

And finally, --hard is the same as --mixed (it changes your HEAD and index), except that --hard also modifies your working directory. If we're at C and run git reset --hard B, then the changes added in C, as well as any uncommitted changes you have, will be removed, and the files in your working copy will match commit B. Since you can permanently lose changes this way, you should always run git status before doing a hard reset to make sure your working directory is clean or that you're okay with losing your uncommitted changes.

And finally, a visualization: enter image description here

Related Solutions

Git – How to undo git reset –hard HEAD~1

Pat Notz is correct. You can get the commit back so long as it's been within a few days. git only garbage collects after about a month or so unless you explicitly tell it to remove newer blobs.

$ git init
Initialized empty Git repository in .git/

$ echo "testing reset" > file1
$ git add file1
$ git commit -m 'added file1'
Created initial commit 1a75c1d: added file1
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 file1

$ echo "added new file" > file2
$ git add file2
$ git commit -m 'added file2'
Created commit f6e5064: added file2
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 file2

$ git reset --hard HEAD^
HEAD is now at 1a75c1d... added file1

$ cat file2
cat: file2: No such file or directory

$ git reflog
1a75c1d... HEAD@{0}: reset --hard HEAD^: updating HEAD
f6e5064... HEAD@{1}: commit: added file2

$ git reset --hard f6e5064
HEAD is now at f6e5064... added file2

$ cat file2
added new file

You can see in the example that the file2 was removed as a result of the hard reset, but was put back in place when I reset via the reflog.

Git – the difference between ‘git pull’ and ‘git fetch’

In the simplest terms, git pull does a git fetch followed by a git merge.

You can do a git fetch at any time to update your remote-tracking branches under refs/remotes/<remote>/. This operation never changes any of your own local branches under refs/heads, and is safe to do without changing your working copy. I have even heard of people running git fetch periodically in a cron job in the background (although I wouldn't recommend doing this).

A git pull is what you would do to bring a local branch up-to-date with its remote version, while also updating your other remote-tracking branches.

From the Git documentation for git pull:

In its default mode, git pull is shorthand for git fetch followed by git merge FETCH_HEAD.

Best Answer

Related Solutions

Git – How to undo git reset –hard HEAD~1

Git – the difference between ‘git pull’ and ‘git fetch’

Related Topic