Completely baffled

[Haszlakiewicz, Eric]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mercurial-bounces at selenic.com [mailto:mercurial-
> 
> Liam Routt wrote:
> > Prior to doing the checkin of the work he'd done, he did a pull +
> update. During
> > the course of that, with no prompts of any sort, the largefile system
> replaced
> > the key flash file he'd been editing with the version from before his
> changes.
> > No one else has changed the file for several days, so it was not a
> case of
> > incoming changes which needed to be merged (and he was not prompted
> to resolve
> > any conflicts), his changed file was simply replaced with the
> "current" version
> > as part of the pull + update, and as a result of course disappeared
> from the
> > list of files to be committed (as we have seen before).
> 
> Largefiles seems to be a red herring in this ...
> 
> This is exactly to be expected activity IF the local changes had not
> been
> committed. I've managed to do much the same myself ...

It is *expected* that an update will overwrite your local changes?!  What are you smoking?

What you're claiming directly contradicts what the help page for the "hg update" command states:
 "...the uncommitted changes are merged into the requested changeset
       and the merged result is left uncommitted."

eric