rename tests of packaging and improve them to avoid spurious system-dependent test failures

**Attachment** default-alias-cleanup.darcs.patch (30025 bytes) added scripts/common.py: don't assume that the default alias is always 'tahoe' (it is, but the API of get_alias doesn't say so). refs #1342

default-alias-cleanup.darcs.patch

29 KiB

davidsarah commented

2011-01-30 17:33:45 +00:00

Author

Owner

+1 on tighter-catch.darcs.patch

+1 on [tighter-catch.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-6a17d7059835)

davidsarah commented

2011-01-30 17:49:06 +00:00

Author

Owner

Reviewing improved-package-tests.darcs.patch :

test-dont-install-newer-dep-when-you-already-have-sufficiently-new-one.py is way too long a filename. Also the test is about which dist is ''built'' and tested (by setup.py test) when an existing one is installed, not about whether the new dist is installed. (It should be "dist", not "dep", since we're talking about a particular version/build.)

How about test-be-satisfied-with-new-enough-dist.py?

test-dont-use-too-old-dep.py (which should be test-dont-use-too-old-dist.py) has this:

# The goal is to turn red if the build system tries to use the
# source dist when it could have used the binary dist.

which I think is a stale comment from a different test.

Reviewing [improved-package-tests.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-40459395b05e) : `test-dont-install-newer-dep-when-you-already-have-sufficiently-new-one.py` is way too long a filename. Also the test is about which dist is ''built'' and tested (by `setup.py test`) when an existing one is installed, not about whether the new dist is installed. (It should be "dist", not "dep", since we're talking about a particular version/build.) How about `test-be-satisfied-with-new-enough-dist.py`? `test-dont-use-too-old-dep.py` (which should be `test-dont-use-too-old-dist.py`) has this: ``` # The goal is to turn red if the build system tries to use the # source dist when it could have used the binary dist. ``` which I think is a stale comment from a different test.

davidsarah commented

2011-01-31 01:50:21 +00:00

Author

Owner

Attachment docs-running-no-install.darcs.patch (30761 bytes) added

docs/running.html: reference quickstart.html instead of install.html, and don't refer to 'installing' Tahoe-LAFS (which is not what the quickstart instructions say to do). refs #1342

**Attachment** docs-running-no-install.darcs.patch (30761 bytes) added docs/running.html: reference quickstart.html instead of install.html, and don't refer to 'installing' Tahoe-LAFS (which is not what the quickstart instructions say to do). refs #1342

docs-running-no-install.darcs.patch

30 KiB

davidsarah commented

2011-02-04 06:31:25 +00:00

Author

Owner

Given that #1355 is a potential regression, we probably shouldn't apply these quite yet.

davidsarah commented

2011-02-04 20:53:22 +00:00

Author

Owner

Attachment relnotes.darcs.patch (30631 bytes) added

relnotes.txt: forseeable -> foreseeable. Don't claim to work on Cygwin (which has been untested for some time).

**Attachment** relnotes.darcs.patch (30631 bytes) added relnotes.txt: forseeable -> foreseeable. Don't claim to work on Cygwin (which has been untested for some time).

relnotes.darcs.patch

30 KiB

arch_o_median commented

2011-03-22 05:26:43 +00:00

Author

Owner

Attachment docfix.darcs.patch (3927 bytes) added

**Attachment** docfix.darcs.patch (3927 bytes) added

docfix.darcs.patch

3.8 KiB

zooko commented

2011-03-23 23:35:15 +00:00

Author

Owner

please review: docfix.darcs.patch

please review: [docfix.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-00985afc99c7)

ChosenOne commented

2011-05-10 19:29:30 +00:00

Author

Owner

+1 on attachment:relnotes.darcs.patch,
attachment:docfix.darcs.patch,
attachment:tighter-catch.darcs.patch,
docs-running-no-install.darcs.patch and
default-alias-cleanup.darcs.patch

Please review improved-package-tests.darcs.patch - I didn't fully grasp that one ;)

+1 on attachment:relnotes.darcs.patch, attachment:docfix.darcs.patch, attachment:tighter-catch.darcs.patch, [docs-running-no-install.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-249f9f8b0f24) and [default-alias-cleanup.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-137fc56a0b2a) Please review [improved-package-tests.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-40459395b05e) - I didn't fully grasp that one ;)

david-sarah@jacaranda.org commented

2011-05-10 19:35:03 +00:00

Author

Owner

In changeset:16a2f71eea022c92:

relnotes.txt: forseeable -> foreseeable. refs #1342

In changeset:16a2f71eea022c92: ``` relnotes.txt: forseeable -> foreseeable. refs #1342 ```

david-sarah@jacaranda.org commented

2011-05-10 19:35:03 +00:00

Author

Owner

In changeset:2dd742b24808d54a:

relnotes.txt: don't claim to work on Cygwin (which has been untested for some time). refs #1342

In changeset:2dd742b24808d54a: ``` relnotes.txt: don't claim to work on Cygwin (which has been untested for some time). refs #1342 ```

zooko commented

2011-05-10 19:42:52 +00:00

Author

Owner

applied tighter-catch.darcs.patch in changeset:b30a269ec2477e84
applied docfix.darcs.patch in changeset:9619812a9db74aab
applied relnotes.darcs.patch in changeset:2dd742b24808d54a and changeset:16a2f71eea022c92
added a M-x whitespace-cleanup in changeset:f251bbece5f8f188

* applied [tighter-catch.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-6a17d7059835) in changeset:b30a269ec2477e84 * applied [docfix.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-00985afc99c7) in changeset:9619812a9db74aab * applied [relnotes.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-9c4ade87da4e) in changeset:2dd742b24808d54a and changeset:16a2f71eea022c92 * added a `M-x whitespace-cleanup` in changeset:f251bbece5f8f188

davidsarah commented

2011-05-11 14:17:11 +00:00

Author

Owner

Replying to ChosenOne:

Please review improved-package-tests.darcs.patch - I didn't fully grasp that one ;)

I saw the test-with-fake-dists.py test, that this patch is based on, looking for a package "fakedependency" on PyPI. Maybe we should split this out into a separate ticket and think more carefully about how to do it.

Replying to [ChosenOne](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/issues/1342#issuecomment-124034): > Please review [improved-package-tests.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-40459395b05e) - I didn't fully grasp that one ;) I saw the `test-with-fake-dists.py` test, that this patch is based on, looking for a package "fakedependency" on PyPI. Maybe we should split this out into a separate ticket and think more carefully about how to do it.

davidsarah commented

2011-05-11 14:22:47 +00:00

Author

Owner

Review still needed for default-alias-cleanup.darcs.patch.

Review still needed for [default-alias-cleanup.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-137fc56a0b2a).

zooko commented

2011-05-11 18:47:16 +00:00

Author

Owner

+1 on default-alias-cleanup.darcs.patch

+1 on [default-alias-cleanup.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-137fc56a0b2a)

zooko commented

2011-05-11 18:51:36 +00:00

Author

Owner

Oh look: ChosenOne went back and edited his earlier comment to add +1's for default-alias-cleanup.darcs.patch and docs-running-no-install.darcs.patch . :-)

ChosenOne: next time please add a new comment instead of editing your old one so that people who are just checking new comments will notice. :-)

Oh look: ChosenOne went back and edited his earlier comment to add +1's for [default-alias-cleanup.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-137fc56a0b2a) and [docs-running-no-install.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-249f9f8b0f24) . :-) ChosenOne: next time please add a new comment instead of editing your old one so that people who are just checking new comments will notice. :-)

davidsarah commented

2011-05-12 13:40:30 +00:00

Author

Owner

docs-running-no-install.darcs.patch is obsoleted by changeset:299e8ad5795d3c22 (which deletes source:docs/running.html and changes source:docs/running.rst to point to source:docs/quickstart.rst).

[docs-running-no-install.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-249f9f8b0f24) is obsoleted by changeset:299e8ad5795d3c22 (which deletes source:docs/running.html and changes source:docs/running.rst to point to source:docs/quickstart.rst).

david-sarah@jacaranda.org commented

2011-05-12 13:42:46 +00:00

Author

Owner

In changeset:49fd2e6e564a0e01:

scripts/common.py: don't assume that the default alias is always 'tahoe' (it is, but the API of get_alias doesn't say so). refs #1342

In changeset:49fd2e6e564a0e01: ``` scripts/common.py: don't assume that the default alias is always 'tahoe' (it is, but the API of get_alias doesn't say so). refs #1342 ```

zooko commented

2011-06-04 01:51:15 +00:00

Author

Owner

If I understand correctly, the only patch that hasn't been reviewed and committed or else superceded is attachment:improved-package-tests.darcs.patch. Changing the name of this ticket!

tahoe-lafs changed title from ~~post-1.8.2 clean-up~~ to rename tests of packaging and improve them to avoid spurious system-dependent test failures

2011-06-04 01:51:15 +00:00

tahoe-lafs modified the milestone from 1.9.0 to soon

2011-07-27 18:22:12 +00:00

Brian Warner <warner@lothar.com> commented

2012-05-13 04:03:03 +00:00

Author

Owner

In changeset:d86776560411accc:

modify build_helpers files

Should close #1342. This makes the actual changes to the two test
files (separated from the 'rename' patch to avoid VC complications).

In changeset:d86776560411accc: ``` modify build_helpers files Should close #1342. This makes the actual changes to the two test files (separated from the 'rename' patch to avoid VC complications). ```

tahoe-lafs added the

fixed

label 2012-05-13 04:03:03 +00:00

Brian Warner <warner@lothar.com> closed this issue

2012-05-13 04:03:03 +00:00

Brian Warner <warner@lothar.com> commented

2012-05-13 04:04:21 +00:00

Author

Owner

In changeset:d86776560411accc:

modify build_helpers files

Should close #1342. This makes the actual changes to the two test
files (separated from the 'rename' patch to avoid VC complications).

In changeset:d86776560411accc: ``` modify build_helpers files Should close #1342. This makes the actual changes to the two test files (separated from the 'rename' patch to avoid VC complications). ```

davidsarah commented

2012-05-13 04:45:36 +00:00

Author

Owner

The original improved-package-tests.darcs.patch renamed some files, and that change hasn't been applied. However, I think the new names (e.g. misc/build_helpers/test-dont-install-newer-dep-when-you-already-have-sufficiently-new-one.py) were excessively long.

Also I don't really understand what improvement this patch is trying to make. AFAICS it hasn't been reviewed, and I was waiting for Zooko to answer comment:12.

The original [improved-package-tests.darcs.patch](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/attachments/000078ac-f3b1-7985-5165-40459395b05e) renamed some files, and that change hasn't been applied. However, I think the new names (e.g. `misc/build_helpers/test-dont-install-newer-dep-when-you-already-have-sufficiently-new-one.py`) were excessively long. Also I don't really understand what improvement this patch is trying to make. AFAICS it hasn't been reviewed, and I was waiting for Zooko to answer comment:12.

warner commented

2012-05-13 04:56:05 +00:00

Author

Owner

Actually I landed a patch just before changeset:d86776560411accc (probably changeset:533e4bc813d299e7) that did the renames, but I forgot to include a "refs #1342", so it didn't get mentioned here. (I split the patch into two pieces, a file-move followed by file-modify, because I had to land it via git (since darcs went into an O(N!) death spiral trying to apply the dpatch) and I wanted to avoid problems in the git/darcs bridge).

I agree that the new names are excessively long, but they're in a fairly obscure corner of the tree so I decided I'd let it go. I skimmed over the changes and they seemed ok. But I did miss that you were asking zooko for something in comment:12 .. sorry about that!

In the buildbot run just now, it didn't look like it was trying to get "fakedependency" from pypi, but I might be missing something. Could you take a look at that run and see if you're still seeing the problem you observed earlier?

Actually I landed a patch just before changeset:d86776560411accc (probably changeset:533e4bc813d299e7) that did the renames, but I forgot to include a "refs #1342", so it didn't get mentioned here. (I split the patch into two pieces, a file-move followed by file-modify, because I had to land it via git (since darcs went into an O(N!) death spiral trying to apply the dpatch) and I wanted to avoid problems in the git/darcs bridge). I agree that the new names are excessively long, but they're in a fairly obscure corner of the tree so I decided I'd let it go. I skimmed over the changes and they seemed ok. But I did miss that you were asking zooko for something in comment:12 .. sorry about that! In the buildbot run just now, it didn't look like it was trying to get "fakedependency" from pypi, but I might be missing something. Could you take a look at that run and see if you're still seeing the problem you observed earlier?

tahoe-lafs removed the

fixed

label 2012-05-13 04:56:05 +00:00

warner reopened this issue

2012-05-13 04:56:05 +00:00

Brian Warner <warner@lothar.com> commented

2012-05-13 06:34:32 +00:00

Author

Owner

In changeset:488b6f8ccdd50eb3:

test-dont-use-too-old-dep.py: fix tarfile timestamps

It turns out that TarFile.addfile() doesn't provide a reasonable default
timestamp, resulting in files dated to 1970 (they're probably wearing
bell-bottoms and listening to disco too). Then, when the bdist_egg command
tries to create a *zip*file with those files, it explodes because zipfiles
cannot handle timestamps before 1980 (it prefers boomboxes and jackets with
straps on the shoulders, thank you very much).

This puts a modern time.time() on the members of the tarfile, allowing future
cryptocoderarchaeologists the opportunity to make fun of fashion trends from
the user's chosen era, rather than an artificially older one.

refs #1342

In changeset:488b6f8ccdd50eb3: ``` test-dont-use-too-old-dep.py: fix tarfile timestamps It turns out that TarFile.addfile() doesn't provide a reasonable default timestamp, resulting in files dated to 1970 (they're probably wearing bell-bottoms and listening to disco too). Then, when the bdist_egg command tries to create a *zip*file with those files, it explodes because zipfiles cannot handle timestamps before 1980 (it prefers boomboxes and jackets with straps on the shoulders, thank you very much). This puts a modern time.time() on the members of the tarfile, allowing future cryptocoderarchaeologists the opportunity to make fun of fashion trends from the user's chosen era, rather than an artificially older one. refs #1342 ```

Brian Warner <warner@lothar.com> commented

2012-05-13 06:35:06 +00:00

Author

Owner

In changeset:488b6f8ccdd50eb3:

test-dont-use-too-old-dep.py: fix tarfile timestamps

It turns out that TarFile.addfile() doesn't provide a reasonable default
timestamp, resulting in files dated to 1970 (they're probably wearing
bell-bottoms and listening to disco too). Then, when the bdist_egg command
tries to create a *zip*file with those files, it explodes because zipfiles
cannot handle timestamps before 1980 (it prefers boomboxes and jackets with
straps on the shoulders, thank you very much).

This puts a modern time.time() on the members of the tarfile, allowing future
cryptocoderarchaeologists the opportunity to make fun of fashion trends from
the user's chosen era, rather than an artificially older one.

refs #1342

In changeset:488b6f8ccdd50eb3: ``` test-dont-use-too-old-dep.py: fix tarfile timestamps It turns out that TarFile.addfile() doesn't provide a reasonable default timestamp, resulting in files dated to 1970 (they're probably wearing bell-bottoms and listening to disco too). Then, when the bdist_egg command tries to create a *zip*file with those files, it explodes because zipfiles cannot handle timestamps before 1980 (it prefers boomboxes and jackets with straps on the shoulders, thank you very much). This puts a modern time.time() on the members of the tarfile, allowing future cryptocoderarchaeologists the opportunity to make fun of fashion trends from the user's chosen era, rather than an artificially older one. refs #1342 ```

davidsarah commented

2012-05-13 23:48:28 +00:00

Author

Owner

Replying to warner:

In the buildbot run just now, it didn't look like it was trying to get "fakedependency" from pypi, but I might be missing something. Could you take a look at that run and see if you're still seeing the problem you observed earlier?

Will do.

Replying to [warner](/tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25/issues/1342#issuecomment-124052): > In the buildbot run just now, it didn't look like it was trying to get "fakedependency" from pypi, but I might be missing something. Could you take a look at that run and see if you're still seeing the problem you observed earlier? Will do.

tahoe-lafs added

packaging

and removed

unknown

labels 2014-09-11 22:42:29 +00:00

rename tests of packaging and improve them to avoid spurious system-dependent test failures #1342