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

Fixes #4003 #4053

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jul 23, 2017
Merged

Fixes #4003 #4053

merged 5 commits into from
Jul 23, 2017

Conversation

d34d10cc
Copy link
Contributor

@d34d10cc d34d10cc commented Jul 9, 2017

Includes a general sanity check to skip further checks if user provided fewer arguments than minimum required and a specific check for corrupted data passed as file.

License: MIT
Signed-off-by: Mateja Milosevic minima38123@gmail.com

Includes a general sanity check to skip further checks if user provided fewer arguments than minimum required and a specific check for corrupted data passed as file.

License: MIT
Signed-off-by: Mateja Milosevic <minima38123@gmail.com>
@Kubuxu
Copy link
Member

Kubuxu commented Jul 9, 2017

This broke quite many things in tests, see for yourself: https://ci.ipfs.team/blue/organizations/jenkins/go-ipfs/detail/PR-4053/1/pipeline/

@d34d10cc
Copy link
Contributor Author

d34d10cc commented Jul 9, 2017

Yep, pretty sure I know what it is.

License: MIT
Signed-off-by: Mateja Milosevic <minima38123@gmail.com>
@d34d10cc
Copy link
Contributor Author

d34d10cc commented Jul 9, 2017

From the looks of it, the only thing that makes the test fail is the fact that now some commands which should output an error output a different error higher up the stack. I apologize, but I haven't had contact with such a developed repository before; should I have modified the tests to reflect the fact I changed the position in the stack the error happens? If so, how?

@Kubuxu
Copy link
Member

Kubuxu commented Jul 9, 2017

Right, the refactor of commands lib is being worked on at https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs-cmds

The early exit on too little arguments is interesting. We are able to provide more info to the user if he misses some arguments, but we are more susceptible to possible bug without it.

cc @whyrusleeping

License: MIT
Signed-off-by: Mateja Milosevic <minima38123@gmail.com>
@d34d10cc
Copy link
Contributor Author

d34d10cc commented Jul 9, 2017

After a little discussion on the irc, it's better to leave just the regular, bug-specific check in.

Tests still fail. Give me a little time to fix this.

@d34d10cc
Copy link
Contributor Author

It was decided that for now, a bandaid fix for this edgecase was enough. It is not certain if this kind of problems will happen again, if they do, a new issue can be created and further solutions can be discussed.

License: MIT
Signed-off-by: Mateja Milosevic <minima38123@gmail.com>
@Kubuxu
Copy link
Member

Kubuxu commented Jul 14, 2017

Could you add a test case in sharness that demonstrates what was the problem before.

License: MIT
Signed-off-by: Mateja Milosevic <minima38123@gmail.com>
@d34d10cc
Copy link
Contributor Author

Done.

@whyrusleeping whyrusleeping merged commit 181dd00 into ipfs:master Jul 23, 2017
@d34d10cc d34d10cc deleted the bugfix branch July 23, 2017 19:23
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants