| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We are inconsistent on the name, we should stick with rootfull.
[NO NEW TESTS NEEDED] Existing tests should handle this and no tests for
machines exists yet.
Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Automated for .go files via gomove [1]:
`gomove github.com/containers/podman/v3 github.com/containers/podman/v4`
Remaining files via vgrep [2]:
`vgrep github.com/containers/podman/v3`
[1] https://github.com/KSubedi/gomove
[2] https://github.com/vrothberg/vgrep
Signed-off-by: Valentin Rothberg <rothberg@redhat.com>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
e2e test failures are rife with messages like:
Expected 1 to equal 0
These make me cry. They're anti-helpful, requiring the reader
to dive into the source code to figure out what those numbers
mean.
Solution: Go tests have a '.Should(Exit(NNN))' mechanism. I
don't know if it spits out a better diagnostic (I have no way
to run e2e tests on my laptop), but I have to fantasize that
it will, and given the state of our flakes I assume that at
least one test will fail and give me the opportunity to see
what the error message looks like.
THIS IS NOT REVIEWABLE CODE. There is no way for a human
to review it. Don't bother. Maybe look at a few random
ones for sanity. If you want to really review, here is
a reproducer of what I did:
cd test/e2e
! positive assertions. The second is the same as the first,
! with the addition of (unnecessary) parentheses because
! some invocations were written that way. The third is BeZero().
perl -pi -e 's/Expect\((\S+)\.ExitCode\(\)\)\.To\(Equal\((\d+)\)\)/Expect($1).Should(Exit($2))/' *_test.go
perl -pi -e 's/Expect\((\S+)\.ExitCode\(\)\)\.To\(\(Equal\((\d+)\)\)\)/Expect($1).Should(Exit($2))/' *_test.go
perl -pi -e 's/Expect\((\S+)\.ExitCode\(\)\)\.To\(BeZero\(\)\)/Expect($1).Should(Exit(0))/' *_test.go
! Same as above, but handles three non-numeric exit codes
! in run_exit_test.go
perl -pi -e 's/Expect\((\S+)\.ExitCode\(\)\)\.To\(Equal\((\S+)\)\)/Expect($1).Should(Exit($2))/' *_test.go
! negative assertions. Difference is the spelling of 'To(Not)',
! 'ToNot', and 'NotTo'. I assume those are all the same.
perl -pi -e 's/Expect\((\S+)\.ExitCode\(\)\)\.To\(Not\(Equal\((0)\)\)\)/Expect($1).To(ExitWithError())/' *_test.go
perl -pi -e 's/Expect\((\S+)\.ExitCode\(\)\)\.ToNot\(Equal\((0)\)\)/Expect($1).To(ExitWithError())/' *_test.go
perl -pi -e 's/Expect\((\S+)\.ExitCode\(\)\)\.NotTo\(Equal\((0)\)\)/Expect($1).To(ExitWithError())/' *_test.go
! negative, old use of BeZero()
perl -pi -e 's/Expect\((\S+)\.ExitCode\(\)\)\.ToNot\(BeZero\(\)\)/Expect($1).Should(ExitWithError())/' *_test.go
Run those on a clean copy of main branch (at the same branch
point as my PR, of course), then diff against a checked-out
copy of my PR. There should be no differences. Then all you
have to review is that my replacements above are sane.
UPDATE: nope, that's not enough, you also need to add gomega/gexec
to the files that don't have it:
perl -pi -e '$_ .= "$1/gexec\"\n" if m!^(.*/onsi/gomega)"!' $(grep -L gomega/gexec $(git log -1 --stat | awk '$1 ~ /test\/e2e\// { print $1}'))
UPDATE 2: hand-edit run_volume_test.go
UPDATE 3: sigh, add WaitWithDefaultTimeout() to a couple of places
UPDATE 4: skip a test due to bug #10935 (race condition)
Signed-off-by: Ed Santiago <santiago@redhat.com>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We missed bumping the go module, so let's do it now :)
* Automated go code with github.com/sirkon/go-imports-rename
* Manually via `vgrep podman/v2` the rest
Signed-off-by: Valentin Rothberg <rothberg@redhat.com>
|
|
|
|
| |
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <jsoref@users.noreply.github.com>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Add some more tests, document cases where remote will not work
Add FIXMEs for tests that should work on podman-remote but currently
do not.
Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
in an effort to speed up the remote testing, we should be using
lookaside storage to avoid pull images as well as importing multiple
images into the RW store.
one test was removed and added into system test by Ed in #8325
Signed-off-by: baude <bbaude@redhat.com>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
There are many use cases where you want to just mount an image
without creating a container on it. For example you might want
to just examine the content in an image after you pull it for
security analysys. Or you might want to just use the executables
on the image without running it in a container.
The image is mounted readonly since we do not want people changing
images.
Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>
|
|
|
|
| |
Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>
|
|
We should default to the user name unmount rather then the internal
name of umount.
Also User namespace was not being handled correctly. We want to inform
the user that if they do a mount when in rootless mode that they have
to be first in the podman unshare state.
Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>
|