How do I properly force a Git push?

Question

I've set up a remote non-bare "main" repo and cloned it to my computer. I made some local changes, updated my local repository, and pushed the changes back to my remote repo. Things were fine up to that point.

Now, I had to change something in the remote repo. Then I changed something in my local repo. I realized that the change to the remote repo was not needed. So I tried to git push from my local repo to my remote repo, but I got an error like:

To prevent you from losing history, non-fast-forward updates were rejected Merge the remote changes before pushing again. See the 'Note about fast-forwards' section of git push --help for details.

I thought that probably a

git push --force

would force my local copy to push changes to the remote one and make it the same. It does force the update, but when I go back to the remote repo and make a commit, I notice that the files contain outdated changes (ones that the main remote repo previously had).

As I mentioned in the comments to one of the answers:

[I] tried forcing, but when going back to master server to save the changes, i get outdated staging. Thus, when i commit the repositories are not the same. And when i try to use git push again, i get the same error.

How can I fix this issue?

Datary

You will soon (git1.8.5, Q4 2013) be able to do a git push -force more carefully. – Comeaux

Related: Force git to overwrite remote files on push. – Troika

As I detail in my own answer, git push --force is indeed another valid way to force push, and will push branches just as well as git push origin master --force with Git's default push.default config settings, though which branches specifically get pushed differs between Git versions prior to 2.0 versus after 2.0. – Troika

git push --force works fine these days, FWIW... – Musky

git push --force-with-lease works even better :), it will refuse to update a branch unless it is the state that you expect. (see developer.atlassian.com/blog/2015/04/force-with-lease) – Polyzoic

just be careful folks > When you force push code to the master branch [remote repo] it deletes the previous code present in the master branch . > and force update your code with the previous code. i.e when you force push previous code will bereplace by your code. [check out this blog for more info ](evilmartians.com/chronicles/…) Happy Coding :) – Paleozoology

I tried git push origin some_branch --force but it always returned Everything is up-to-date message. But, git push origin your_branch:some_branch --force and this was what I was missing. Hope it helps! – Landsknecht

Answer 1

Just do:

git push origin <your_branch_name> --force

or if you have a specific repo:

git push https://git.... --force

This will delete your previous commit(s) and push your current one.

It may not be proper, but if anyone stumbles upon this page, thought they might want a simple solution...

Short flag

Also note that -f is short for --force, so

git push origin <your_branch_name> -f

will also work.

Curitiba

You can use git push origin +master instead, which allow you push multiple refspecs without forcing them all. – Goingson

Be aware that, if you accidentally do just git push --force, you might end up messing you master branch (depending on your push default behavior).. Which might suck.. a bit.. :D – Document

@Document starting with Git version 2.0, the default behavior of git push --force is basically to force push the currently checked-out branch to its remote-counter part, so if you have the master branch checked out, then it's identical to git push origin master --force. It'll be different if you're using the matching setting for push.default, which is the default for Git versions prior to 2.0. matching pushes all locals branches to remote ones that have the same name, so force pushing then could definitely be not what you want to do... – Troika

@Document But with Git 2.0, the default is safer, or at least it's no more dangerous than git push origin master --force is. – Troika

Oops, not worked for mee (!), but I used git push -f , is not the same?? See (need to correct?) https://mcmap.net/q/12161/-editing-the-git-commit-message-in-github – Dora

push -f is good but not recoomended for master since most corporate repositories have -f disabled for master. the merge -s ours worked for me – Bullivant

More generally: git push -f <remote> <branch> – Elisavetgrad

unfortunately on gitlab you will still have old history. – Tuberosity

Don't forget that your remote repo permissions (read: Azure DevOps) for your account, might not grant permission to force push. In that case, you'll need an administrator to set your permissions. – Bamako

--force-with-lease is a better option because it will not push if the state of the remote has changed since the last pull – Radiotherapy

I was always doing git push origin +mybranch then one day I've accidentally done git push origin :mybranch and deleted my branch and blocked the Pull Request so that it couldn't be reopened and made everyone's day more difficult TL;DR just use git push origin mybranch -f – Recess

Answer 2

And if push --force doesn't work you can do push --delete. Look at 2^nd line on this instance:

git reset --hard HEAD~3  # reset current branch to 3 commits ago
git push origin master --delete  # do a very very bad bad thing
git push origin master  # regular push

But beware...

Never ever go back on a public git history!

In other words:

• Don't ever force push on a public repository.
• Don't do this or anything that can break someone's pull.
• Don't ever reset or rewrite history in a repo someone might have already pulled.

Of course there are exceptionally rare exceptions even to this rule, but in most cases it's not needed to do it and it will generate problems to everyone else.

Do a revert instead.

And always be careful with what you push to a public repo. Reverting:

git revert -n HEAD~3..HEAD  # prepare a new commit reverting last 3 commits
git commit -m "sorry - revert last 3 commits because I was not careful"
git push origin master  # regular push

In effect, both origin HEADs (from the revert and from the evil reset) will contain the same files.

---

edit to add updated info and more arguments around push --force

Consider pushing force with lease instead of push, but still prefer revert

Another problem push --force may bring is when someone push anything before you do, but after you've already fetched. If you push force your rebased version now you will replace work from others.

git push --force-with-lease introduced in the git 1.8.5 (thanks to @VonC comment on the question) tries to address this specific issue. Basically, it will bring an error and not push if the remote was modified since your latest fetch.

This is good if you're really sure a push --force is needed, but still want to prevent more problems. I'd go as far to say it should be the default push --force behaviour. But it's still far from being an excuse to force a push. People who fetched before your rebase will still have lots of troubles, which could be easily avoided if you had reverted instead.

And since we're talking about git --push instances...

Why would anyone want to force push?

@linquize brought a good push force example on the comments: sensitive data. You've wrongly leaked data that shouldn't be pushed. If you're fast enough, you can "fix"* it by forcing a push on top.

* The data will still be on the remote unless you also do a garbage collect, or clean it somehow. There is also the obvious potential for it to be spread by others who'd fetched it already, but you get the idea.

Sacksen

Looks like it's possible to do a pull after this, but hard #9814316 – Musky

The problem, @rogerdpack, isn't if it's doable. It is. But it can sum up to a big disaster. The more someone do it (force push) and the less often you update (pull) from the public repo, the bigger the disaster. It can dismantle the world as you know it!!!111 At least the world comprising of that particular repository. – Sacksen

If you have sensitive data, force push it – Landy

@Landy not following. I'd say if you have sensitive data, revert it. – Sacksen

@Cawas: I think he means that if you are trying to remove sensitive data from the repository, then you want to rewrite history. If you revert, the sensitive data is still there in the earlier commit. That said, if someone else has already pulled from the repository, then rewriting history won't help you prevent them from accessing the sensitive data - it's already too late at that point. – Romain

@StuartGolodetz thanks for clarifying! I completely misinterpreted "sensitive" there - I was thinking just "important" and not "classified". – Sacksen

git push origin master --delete # do a very very bad bad thing git push origin master # regular push this actually solved my problem perfectly (on a repo with only me and my friend). maybe it's wrong for public repos but for a private one this is a life saver. – Maniple

There is also the case that you are not pushing to a public server. You are pushing to some other repo to build on a dev box or something, and no one is interested in the old version of your work. – Assertion

Why would anyone want to force push? May be someone has made a commit that you want to discard completely. #37133084 – Gyrfalcon

this happens automatically with some repo managers, a.k.a. auto-squash etc. force pushing after finishing a feature branch to reduce commits is common and expected. – Barrier

Do NOT delete remote branch - rename it – Wineglass

Answer 3

If I'm on my local branch A, and I want to force push local branch B to the origin branch C I can use the following syntax:

git push --force origin B:C

Wolpert

I found out that even I'm on my local branch B, I still need to do git push --force origin B:C. In my case, it seems that git push --force origin C will only push from local master to remote C branch, regardless of which branch I'm currently on. git version 2.3.8 (Apple Git-58) – Kuhlmann

This helped me when moving a repository from the previous master branch to the new main branch. Just used master:main and it worked as I needed! – Helyn

Answer 4

use this following command:

git push -f origin master

Swob

Maybe give some more explanation about why this answer is preferable to the other ones, and what makes it different. – Interrogative

oh ,sorry for inconvenience , I was having the same problem and this command solve it , i thought i should share it . – Swob

It's just the same as the others, you just changed the position of the -f flag... – Backstretch

Answer 5

First of all, I would not make any changes directly in the "main" repo. If you really want to have a "main" repo, then you should only push to it, never change it directly.

Regarding the error you are getting, have you tried git pull from your local repo, and then git push to the main repo? What you are currently doing (if I understood it well) is forcing the push and then losing your changes in the "main" repo. You should merge the changes locally first.

Clemenciaclemency

yes i tried a pull but i'm losing losing data because of that pull. I want to make my main repos as my local is, without first updating from the main. – Datary

In that case use git push -f, but then if you change your main repo again, you have to go back to your local repo and git pull, so that it gets in sync with the latest changes. Then you can do your work, and push again. If you follow this "push-pull" workflow, you won't get the kind of error you were complaining about. – Clemenciaclemency

yeah, i understand that this was my fault :/ I will try that and get back in a little while thanx – Datary

tried forcing, but when going back to master server to save the changes, i get outdated staging. Thus, when i commit the repositories are not the same. And when i try to use git push again, i get the same error. – Datary

Answer 6

git push --force would do the job, although git push --force-with-lease is a safer command

git push --force overwrites the remote branch, while git push --force-with-lease only overwrites the remote branch if your local copy is aware of all of the commits on the remote branch. This difference makes it significantly more difficult to destroy someone else’s changes on the project.

Silverstein

Answer 7

I would really recommend to:

• push only to the main repo

• make sure that main repo is a bare repo, in order to never have any problem with the main repo working tree being not in sync with its .git base. See "How to push a local git repository to another computer?"

• If you do have to make modification in the main (bare) repo, clone it (on the main server), do your modification and push back to it

In other words, keep a bare repo accessible both from the main server and the local computer, in order to have a single upstream repo from/to which to pull/pull.

Comeaux

Can you even push to a non-bare git repository? – Variegation

@Variegation Yes, since Git 2.4 (Q2 2015): https://mcmap.net/q/12163/-i-can-39-t-push-checkouts-of-previous-commits-to-remote-bare-repo-why, which references https://mcmap.net/q/12164/-can-git-push-to-the-current-branch-of-a-remote-repository. – Comeaux

Answer 8

I had the same question but figured it out finally. What you most likely need to do is run the following two git commands (replacing hash with the git commit revision number):

git checkout <hash>
git push -f HEAD:master

Vivle

Answer 9

if you are authenticating with Github access token, try this:

• git remote set-url origin https://[email protected]/UserName/ProjectName

• git push --force --set-upstream origin master

Kentledge

Answer 10

Using --force-with-lease might be a better option:

git push <remote> <branch> --force-with-lease

It makes sure no one has updated the branch before you modified it, so you don't overwrite their changes.

Landri

Answer 11

This was our solution for replacing master on a corporate gitHub repository while maintaining history.

push -f to master on corporate repositories is often disabled to maintain branch history. This solution worked for us.

git fetch desiredOrigin
git checkout -b master desiredOrigin/master // get origin master

---

git checkout currentBranch  // move to target branch
git merge -s ours master  // merge using ours over master
// vim will open for the commit message
git checkout master  // move to master
git merge currentBranch  // merge resolved changes into master

---

push your branch to desiredOrigin and create a PR

Bullivant

Answer 12

My issue was--I did:

git checkout arbitrary_commit
git push origin master --force

which was not the right thing to do. Instead I had to:

git reset HEAD~3
git push origin master --force

Note: the number 3 is just an example. You should put your own number.

Superintendent