On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:39:51PM +0000, Martin von Zweigbergk via Mercurial-devel wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 4:34 PM Durham Goode <dur...@fb.com> wrote: > > > On 10/17/16, 4:13 PM, "Martin von Zweigbergk" <martinv...@google.com> > > wrote: > > > > ># HG changeset patch > > ># User Martin von Zweigbergk <martinv...@google.com> > > ># Date 1476745932 25200 > > ># Mon Oct 17 16:12:12 2016 -0700 > > ># Node ID b36a81cd4015b9742d1fbb0d5f94207e7a400cdb > > ># Parent 8a864844d5a0c34bdb24d2e098a0cd339e32e020 > > >treemanifest: fix bad argument order to treemanifestctx > > > > > >Found by running tests with _treeinmem (both of them) modified to be > > >True. > > > > > >diff -r 8a864844d5a0 -r b36a81cd4015 mercurial/manifest.py > > >--- a/mercurial/manifest.py Wed Oct 12 21:33:45 2016 +0200 > > >+++ b/mercurial/manifest.py Mon Oct 17 16:12:12 2016 -0700 > > >@@ -1386,7 +1386,7 @@ > > > # Need to perform a slow delta > > > revlog = self._revlog > > > r0 = revlog.deltaparent(revlog.rev(self._node)) > > >- m0 = treemanifestctx(revlog, revlog.node(r0), > > dir=self._dir).read() > > >+ m0 = treemanifestctx(revlog, self._dir, revlog.node(r0)).read() > > > m1 = self.read() > > > md = treemanifest(dir=self._dir) > > > for f, ((n0, fl0), (n1, fl1)) in m0.diff(m1).iteritems(): > > > > Looks good to me. What would be required to get some _treeinmem code > > coverage in the tests?
LGTM as well - I can't get the patch to apply - maybe some damage in flight. Please feel encouraged to just push it to committed and let us know here that you've done that. _______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel