1 files changed, 45 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/toolkit/components/backgroundtasks/tests/xpcshell/test_backgroundtask_shouldprocessupdates.js b/toolkit/components/backgroundtasks/tests/xpcshell/test_backgroundtask_shouldprocessupdates.js
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..27dce8b99f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/toolkit/components/backgroundtasks/tests/xpcshell/test_backgroundtask_shouldprocessupdates.js
@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+/* -*- indent-tabs-mode: nil; js-indent-level: 2 -*-
+ * vim: sw=4 ts=4 sts=4 et
+ * This Source Code Form is subject to the terms of the Mozilla Public
+ * License, v. 2.0. If a copy of the MPL was not distributed with this
+ * file, You can obtain one at http://mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/. */
+
+add_task(async function test_backgroundtask_shouldprocessupdates() {
+  // The task returns 81 if we should process updates, i.e.,
+  // !ShouldNotProcessUpdates(), <= 80 otherwise.  xpcshell itself counts as an
+  // instance, so the background task will see it and think another instance is
+  // running.  N.b.: this isn't as robust as it could be: running Firefox
+  // instances and parallel tests interact here (mostly harmlessly).
+  //
+  // Since the behaviour under test (ShouldNotProcessUpdates()) happens at startup,
+  // we can't easily change the lock location of the background task.
+
+  // `shouldprocessupdates` is an updating task, but there is another instance
+  // running, so we should not process updates.
+  let exitCode = await do_backgroundtask("shouldprocessupdates", {
+    extraArgs: ["--test-process-updates"],
+  });
+  Assert.equal(80, exitCode);
+
+  // If we change our lock location, the background task won't see our instance
+  // running.
+  let file = do_get_profile();
+  file.append("customExePath");
+  let syncManager = Cc["@mozilla.org/updates/update-sync-manager;1"].getService(
+    Ci.nsIUpdateSyncManager
+  );
+  syncManager.resetLock(file);
+
+  // Since we've changed the xpcshell executable name, the background task won't
+  // see us and think another instance is running.  This time, there is no
+  // reason to not process updates.
+  exitCode = await do_backgroundtask("shouldprocessupdates");
+  Assert.equal(81, exitCode);
+
+  // `shouldnotprocessupdates` is not a recognized updating task, so we should
+  // not process updates.
+  exitCode = await do_backgroundtask("shouldnotprocessupdates", {
+    extraArgs: ["--test-process-updates"],
+  });
+  Assert.equal(78, exitCode);
+});