Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

wait.For() can return ambigous errors #1401

Closed
3 tasks done
quenbyako opened this issue May 14, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #1403
Closed
3 tasks done

wait.For() can return ambigous errors #1401

quenbyako opened this issue May 14, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #1403

Comments

@quenbyako
Copy link
Contributor

  • Yes, I'm using a binary release within 2 latest releases.
  • Yes, I've searched similar issues on GitHub and didn't find any.
  • Yes, I've included all information below (version, config, etc).

What did you expect to see?

wait.For returns nil error if deadline exceeded

What did you see instead?

If certificate got deadline For() returns nil error wrapped by fmt:

obtaining certificate: error: one or more domains had a problem:
[example.com] time limit exceeded: last error: %!w(<nil>)

So, this is not good: it's way more better if we can replace timeout to context and return DeadlineExceeded or bare error which returns from callback

Steps to reproduce

  1. idk, just put into wait.For() some callback, which never returns any error

Details

Version of lego

discovered on v4.2.0 reproduces as well on v4.3.1

Logs no any logs, idk
@quenbyako quenbyako added the bug label May 14, 2021
@ldez ldez changed the title [BUG]: wait.For() can return ambigous errors wait.For() can return ambigous errors May 14, 2021
@ldez ldez added enhancement and removed bug labels May 14, 2021
@ldez ldez added the area/lib label May 14, 2021
@quenbyako
Copy link
Contributor Author

how fast lego developers are:

image

Thanks a lot for this fix! You rock guys, love this project

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants