| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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>
|
| |
|
|
| |
Signed-off-by: Peter Hunt <pehunt@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>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Currently the --pull missing|always|never is ignored
This PR implements this for local API. For remote we
need to default to pullpolicy specified in the containers.conf
file.
Also fixed an issue when images were matching other images names
based on prefix, causing images to always be pulled.
I had named an image myfedora and when ever I pulled fedora, the system
thought that it there were two images named fedora since it was checking
for the name fedora as well as the prefix fedora. I changed it to check
for fedora and the prefix /fedora, to prefent failures like I had.
Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
If we select "unconfined" as AppArmor profile, then we should not error
even if the host does not support it at all. This behavior has been
fixed and a corresponding e2e test has been added as well.
Signed-off-by: Sascha Grunert <sgrunert@suse.com>
|
| |
|
|
| |
Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>
|
|
|
Currently you can not apply an ApparmorProfile if you specify
--privileged. This patch will allow both to be specified
simultaniosly.
By default Apparmor should be disabled if the user
specifies --privileged, but if the user specifies --security apparmor:PROFILE,
with --privileged, we should do both.
Added e2e run_apparmor_test.go
Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>
|
