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

test: actually test the ttywrap portion of getasyncid #18886

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 22, 2018

Conversation

Fishrock123
Copy link
Member

@Fishrock123 Fishrock123 commented Feb 20, 2018

Follow-up from #18800

Code that tries to exercise tty fds must be placed in /pseudo-tty/.

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/13290/

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • tests and/or benchmarks are included
  • commit message follows commit guidelines
Affected core subsystem(s)

test, tty

@Fishrock123 Fishrock123 added test Issues and PRs related to the tests. tty Issues and PRs related to the tty subsystem. labels Feb 20, 2018
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added test Issues and PRs related to the tests. tty Issues and PRs related to the tty subsystem. labels Feb 20, 2018
Copy link
Member

@BridgeAR BridgeAR left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, just two nits.

@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
'use strict';

// see also test/sequential/test-async-wrap-getasyncid.js
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This could get outdated easily and I doubt that we actually need that comment. The same applies to the other file accordingly.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

imo, better to have something than nothing

process.removeAllListeners('uncaughtException');
hooks.disable();

const obj_keys = Object.keys(providers);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: can we go for camelCase instead? :-)

@BridgeAR BridgeAR added the author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. label Feb 21, 2018
Follow-up from nodejs#18800

Code that tries to exercise tty fds must be placed in `/pseudo-tty/`.

PR-URL: nodejs#18886
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
@Fishrock123 Fishrock123 merged commit af91d94 into nodejs:master Feb 22, 2018
@Fishrock123 Fishrock123 deleted the actually-test-tty-getasyncid branch February 22, 2018 17:10
Fishrock123 added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 22, 2018
Follow-up from #18800

Code that tries to exercise tty fds must be placed in `/pseudo-tty/`.

PR-URL: #18886
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
@Fishrock123
Copy link
Member Author

oops, title was too long. actually landed in 0a26280

@MylesBorins
Copy link
Member

Should this be backported to v9.x-staging? If yes please follow the guide and raise a backport PR, if not let me know or add the dont-land-on label.

BridgeAR pushed a commit to BridgeAR/node that referenced this pull request May 1, 2018
Follow-up from nodejs#18800

Code that tries to exercise tty fds must be placed in `/pseudo-tty/`.

PR-URL: nodejs#18886
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
MayaLekova pushed a commit to MayaLekova/node that referenced this pull request May 8, 2018
Follow-up from nodejs#18800

Code that tries to exercise tty fds must be placed in `/pseudo-tty/`.

PR-URL: nodejs#18886
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. test Issues and PRs related to the tests. tty Issues and PRs related to the tty subsystem.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants