[PATCH] largefiles: fix support for local largefiles while using share extension

[Sean Farley]

Augie Fackler <raf at durin42.com> writes:

>> On Jun 6, 2016, at 02:35, Henrik Stuart <henriks+hg at unity3d.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On 04-06-2016 04:33, Augie Fackler wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 09:55:48AM +0200, Henrik Stuart wrote:
>>>> # HG changeset patch
>>>> # User Henrik Stuart <henriks at unity3d.com>
>>>> # Date 1464938050 -7200
>>>> #      Fri Jun 03 09:14:10 2016 +0200
>>>> # Branch stable
>>>> # Node ID 59465e5e6b059e848e2e127f263288bceaa49015
>>>> # Parent  e82ca7d0967cd10d92562820297c3413abe6fc29
>>>> largefiles: fix support for local largefiles while using share extension
>>> 
>>> I agree this makes sense for stable.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Prior to revision 2a3f24786d09, largefiles were saved in the local repository,
>>>> even if it was using the share extension. After that change, all largefiles are
>>>> now stored in the shared repository. However, the backward compatibility for
>>>> existing largefiles already placed in the local repository was never tested,
>>>> and has been broken since.
>>>> 
>>>> diff --git a/hgext/largefiles/lfutil.py b/hgext/largefiles/lfutil.py
>>>> --- a/hgext/largefiles/lfutil.py
>>>> +++ b/hgext/largefiles/lfutil.py
>>>> @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@
>>>>     if instore(repo, hash):
>>>>         return (path, True)
>>>>     elif repo.shared() and instore(repo, hash, True):
>>>> -        return storepath(repo, hash, True)
>>>> +        return storepath(repo, hash, True), True
>>>> 
>>>>     return (path, False)
>>>> 
>>>> diff --git a/tests/test-largefiles-shared-repo.t b/tests/test-largefiles-shared-repo.t
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/tests/test-largefiles-shared-repo.t
>>> 
>>> However, could this be bolted on to the end of an existing largefiles
>>> test? That'd let us avoid duplicating a lot of repository setup work.
>> 
>> It could potentially be rolled into test-largefiles-cache like Matt suggests in a separate mail, but I rather prefer to keep the interaction between largefiles and share in its own test file, building out test-largefiles-shared-repo for further scenarios that involve both extensions. However, I don't feel strongly about it, and we can easily go with Matt's suggestion. Just let me know if I should resend the patch with Matt's suggestion instead.
>
> Let's just go with mpm's suggestion for now.

Just FYI, it was Matt H. not mpm.