8231591: [TESTBUG] Create additional two phase jpackage tests #263

sashamatveev · 2020-09-19T02:42:27Z

https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8231591

Added MultiLauncherTwoPhaseTest which uses predefine app image with multiple launcher and tests to make sure installer will create shortcuts for all launchers.
Fixed Linux DesktopIntegration to create shortcuts for additional launcher if we using pre-define app image.

Progress

Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
Commit message must refer to an issue
Change must be properly reviewed

Issue

JDK-8231591: [TESTBUG] Create additional two phase jpackage tests

Reviewers

Alexey Semenyuk (@alexeysemenyukoracle - Committer)
Andy Herrick (@andyherrick - Reviewer)

Download

$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/263/head:pull/263
$ git checkout pull/263

bridgekeeper · 2020-09-19T02:44:43Z

👋 Welcome back almatvee! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

openjdk · 2020-09-19T02:46:06Z

@sashamatveev The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request: core-libs.

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an RFR email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label (add|remove) "label" command.

mlbridge · 2020-09-19T02:49:33Z

Webrevs

alexeysemenyukoracle

How about testing of other jpackage command line options in two phase mode? Like "--name", "--version"? Any plans to add them?

alexeysemenyukoracle · 2020-09-21T14:39:33Z

...jdk.incubator.jpackage/linux/classes/jdk/incubator/jpackage/internal/DesktopIntegration.java

@@ -524,6 +546,7 @@ private static String stringifyShellCommands(List<String> commands) {

    private final List<LinuxFileAssociation> associations;

+    private static boolean initAppImageLaunchers = true;


What is the logic behind static variable?

It is used to avoid infinite calls in DesktopIntegration(). I modified it by removing PREDEFINED_APP_IMAGE from launcherParams.

alexeysemenyukoracle · 2020-09-21T14:39:33Z

test/jdk/tools/jpackage/helpers/jdk/jpackage/test/WindowsHelper.java

            cmd.verifyIsOfType(PackageType.WINDOWS);
            this.cmd = cmd;
+            this.name = name;


I'd suggest to have the following initialization of "name" field:
this.name = (name == null ? cmd.name() : name)
This will help to avoid multiple (name == null ? cmd.name() : name) in the code.

alexeysemenyukoracle · 2020-09-21T14:39:33Z

test/jdk/tools/jpackage/share/MultiLauncherTwoPhaseTest.java

+
+public class MultiLauncherTwoPhaseTest {
+
+    public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {


Please replace main() function with dedicated test function. You can use SimplePackageTest as a template, This would give better control on how to run the test in debug mode.

alexeysemenyukoracle · 2020-09-21T14:39:33Z

test/jdk/tools/jpackage/share/MultiLauncherTwoPhaseTest.java

+                    .addInstallVerifier(cmd -> {
+                        launcher1.verify(cmd);
+                        launcher1.verifyPackageInstalled(cmd);
+                        launcher2.verify(cmd);
+                        launcher2.verifyPackageInstalled(cmd);
+                    });


Looks like a duplicate of verify logic added with the preceding addInstallVerifier() call.

alexeysemenyukoracle · 2020-09-21T14:39:33Z

test/jdk/tools/jpackage/share/MultiLauncherTwoPhaseTest.java

+                                "--win-menu-group", "MultiLauncherTwoPhaseTest");
+                    })
+                    .addInstallVerifier(cmd -> {
+                        launcher1.verify(cmd);


There is no need in explicit call to AdditionalLauncher.verify() as this function is scheduled for the call from AdditionalLauncher.applyTo() call.
Thus there is no need to change access to this function from "private" to "public" in your patch to AdditionalLauncher.java.

alexeysemenyukoracle · 2020-09-21T14:39:33Z

test/jdk/tools/jpackage/share/MultiLauncherTwoPhaseTest.java

+
+    public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
+        TKit.run(args, () -> {
+            Path appimageOutput = TKit.workDir().resolve("appimage");


Please use TKit.createTempDirectory() to create directories for intermediate data of test runs. This allows clean multiple runs of the test in the same work directory.

alexeysemenyukoracle · 2020-09-21T14:39:33Z

test/jdk/tools/jpackage/helpers/jdk/jpackage/test/AdditionalLauncher.java

+        Path appInstallDir = cmd.appInstallationDirectory();
+        if (TKit.isLinux() && Path.of("/").equals(appInstallDir)) {
+            ApplicationLayout appLayout = cmd.appLayout();
+            TKit.assertPathExists(appLayout.runtimeDirectory(), false);
+        } else {
+            TKit.assertPathExists(appInstallDir, false);
+        }


I don't understand what is going on here and why branching is required. Also seems like verifyPackageUninstalled() function is never called.

alexeysemenyukoracle · 2020-09-21T14:39:33Z

test/jdk/tools/jpackage/helpers/jdk/jpackage/test/PackageTest.java

-                    new WindowsHelper.DesktopIntegrationVerifier(cmd);
+                    new WindowsHelper.DesktopIntegrationVerifier(cmd, null);


I'd rather add a loop calling DesktopIntegrationVerifier() for all launchers than copy/paste the code in AdditionalLauncher.java

Fixed. I also removed code from AdditionalLaunchers.

sashamatveev · 2020-09-22T02:49:50Z

How about testing of other jpackage command line options in two phase mode? Like "--name", "--version"? Any plans to add them?

Plan was to file separate bugs for any additional options. I do not think we should put everything in one issue. This issue for desktop integration for additional launchers.

…on 1)

…on 2)

andyherrick · 2020-09-22T14:45:16Z

How about testing of other jpackage command line options in two phase mode? Like "--name", "--version"? Any plans to add them?

Plan was to file separate bugs for any additional options. I do not think we should put everything in one issue. This issue for desktop integration for additional launchers.

Agree that separate bugs can be filed for additional options, can you file them ?
I am testing in conjunction with #271

alexeysemenyukoracle · 2020-09-23T18:08:53Z

test/jdk/tools/jpackage/helpers/jdk/jpackage/test/PackageTest.java

@@ -618,6 +633,7 @@ private void verifyPackageUninstalled(JPackageCommand cmd) {
    private Map<PackageType, Handler> handlers;
    private Set<String> namedInitializers;
    private Map<PackageType, PackageHandlers> packageHandlers;
+    private final List<String> launchersName = new ArrayList();


Would the variable name "launcherNames" be more accurate?

alexeysemenyukoracle · 2020-09-23T18:08:53Z

test/jdk/tools/jpackage/helpers/jdk/jpackage/test/PackageTest.java

@@ -317,6 +317,11 @@ public PackageTest configureHelloApp(String javaAppDesc) {
        return this;
    }

+    public PackageTest addLauncherName(String name) {


There is no need to make this function public and explicitly call it from tests.
It would be better to add call to this function from AdditionalLauncher.applyTo(PackageTest).

But test calls AdditionalLauncher.applyTo(JPackageCommand cmd), which does not have reference to PackageTest. Do you know why we need two applyTo()?

Just change the test code to call AdditionalLauncher.applyTo(PackageTest):
launcher1.applyTo(packageTest); launcher2.applyTo(packageTest)

AdditionalLauncher.applyTo(JPackageCommand) is for non-packaging tests.

Actually it will not work. I am running appImageCmd command before test executes to generate app image. If I add it to packageTest, jpackage will fail when trying to run command with app-image and launchers.

I will keep addLauncherName() inside test to add launchers manually and will also call it in applyTo(PackageTest) for future tests, that might use such functionality.

…on 3)

openjdk · 2020-09-25T20:17:16Z

@sashamatveev This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for more details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8231591: [TESTBUG] Create additional two phase jpackage tests

Reviewed-by: asemenyuk, herrick

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 156 new commits pushed to the master branch:

b159e4e: 8253149: Building an installer from invalid app image fails on Window…
0e855fe: 8252377: Incorrect encoding for EC AlgorithmIdentifier
9150b90: 8253659: ProblemList sun/security/ec/TestEC.java on linux-aarch64
0187567: 8250984: Memory Docker tests fail on some Linux kernels w/o cgroupv1 …
a75edc2: 8251188: Update LDAP tests not to use wildcard addresses
1f5a033: 8253555: Make ByteSize and WordSize typed scoped enums
f62eefc: 8253469: ARM32 Zero: replace usages of __sync_synchronize() with OrderAccess::fence
1b79326: 8242451: ensure semantics of non-capturing lambdas are preserved independent of execution mode
dc1ef58: 8253631: Remove unimplemented CompileBroker methods after JEP-165
27d0a70: 8253633: Remove unimplemented TieredThresholdPolicy::set_carry_if_neccessary
... and 146 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/ac9d1b08ee4a9f54cd75a4115adffcc4c0fb105d...master

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

sashamatveev · 2020-09-25T23:00:14Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2020-09-25T23:02:18Z

@sashamatveev Since your change was applied there have been 156 commits pushed to the master branch:

b159e4e: 8253149: Building an installer from invalid app image fails on Window…
0e855fe: 8252377: Incorrect encoding for EC AlgorithmIdentifier
9150b90: 8253659: ProblemList sun/security/ec/TestEC.java on linux-aarch64
0187567: 8250984: Memory Docker tests fail on some Linux kernels w/o cgroupv1 …
a75edc2: 8251188: Update LDAP tests not to use wildcard addresses
1f5a033: 8253555: Make ByteSize and WordSize typed scoped enums
f62eefc: 8253469: ARM32 Zero: replace usages of __sync_synchronize() with OrderAccess::fence
1b79326: 8242451: ensure semantics of non-capturing lambdas are preserved independent of execution mode
dc1ef58: 8253631: Remove unimplemented CompileBroker methods after JEP-165
27d0a70: 8253633: Remove unimplemented TieredThresholdPolicy::set_carry_if_neccessary
... and 146 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/ac9d1b08ee4a9f54cd75a4115adffcc4c0fb105d...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

Pushed as commit 5a57945.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

8231591: [TESTBUG] Create additional two phase jpackage tests

e5254d2

openjdk bot added the rfr label Sep 19, 2020

openjdk bot added the core-libs label Sep 19, 2020

alexeysemenyukoracle suggested changes Sep 21, 2020

View changes

sashamatveev added 2 commits Sep 22, 2020

8231591: [TESTBUG] Create additional two phase jpackage tests (revisi…

5303fcc

…on 1)

8231591: [TESTBUG] Create additional two phase jpackage tests (revisi…

650cf21

…on 2)

alexeysemenyukoracle reviewed Sep 23, 2020

View changes

8231591: [TESTBUG] Create additional two phase jpackage tests (revisi…

da929c9

…on 3)

alexeysemenyukoracle approved these changes Sep 25, 2020

View changes

andyherrick approved these changes Sep 25, 2020

View changes

openjdk bot added the ready label Sep 25, 2020

openjdk bot closed this Sep 25, 2020

openjdk bot added integrated and removed ready rfr labels Sep 25, 2020

8231591: [TESTBUG] Create additional two phase jpackage tests #263

8231591: [TESTBUG] Create additional two phase jpackage tests #263

sashamatveev commented Sep 19, 2020 •

edited by openjdk[bot] bot

bridgekeeper bot commented Sep 19, 2020

openjdk bot commented Sep 19, 2020

mlbridge bot commented Sep 19, 2020 •

edited

alexeysemenyukoracle left a comment

alexeysemenyukoracle Sep 21, 2020

sashamatveev Sep 21, 2020

alexeysemenyukoracle Sep 21, 2020

sashamatveev Sep 22, 2020

alexeysemenyukoracle Sep 21, 2020

sashamatveev Sep 22, 2020

alexeysemenyukoracle Sep 21, 2020

alexeysemenyukoracle Sep 21, 2020

sashamatveev Sep 22, 2020

alexeysemenyukoracle Sep 21, 2020

sashamatveev Sep 22, 2020

alexeysemenyukoracle Sep 21, 2020

alexeysemenyukoracle Sep 21, 2020

sashamatveev Sep 22, 2020

sashamatveev commented Sep 22, 2020

andyherrick commented Sep 22, 2020

alexeysemenyukoracle Sep 23, 2020

alexeysemenyukoracle Sep 23, 2020

sashamatveev Sep 23, 2020

alexeysemenyukoracle Sep 24, 2020

sashamatveev Sep 24, 2020

sashamatveev Sep 24, 2020

openjdk bot commented Sep 25, 2020 •

edited

sashamatveev commented Sep 25, 2020

openjdk bot commented Sep 25, 2020

		@@ -524,6 +546,7 @@ private static String stringifyShellCommands(List<String> commands) {

		private final List<LinuxFileAssociation> associations;

		private static boolean initAppImageLaunchers = true;


		public class MultiLauncherTwoPhaseTest {

		public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {

		new WindowsHelper.DesktopIntegrationVerifier(cmd);
		new WindowsHelper.DesktopIntegrationVerifier(cmd, null);

8231591: [TESTBUG] Create additional two phase jpackage tests #263

8231591: [TESTBUG] Create additional two phase jpackage tests #263

Conversation

sashamatveev commented Sep 19, 2020 • edited by openjdk[bot] bot

Progress

Issue

Reviewers

Download

bridgekeeper bot commented Sep 19, 2020

openjdk bot commented Sep 19, 2020

mlbridge bot commented Sep 19, 2020 • edited

Webrevs

alexeysemenyukoracle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sashamatveev commented Sep 22, 2020

andyherrick commented Sep 22, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

openjdk bot commented Sep 25, 2020 • edited

sashamatveev commented Sep 25, 2020

openjdk bot commented Sep 25, 2020

sashamatveev commented Sep 19, 2020 •

edited by openjdk[bot] bot

mlbridge bot commented Sep 19, 2020 •

edited

openjdk bot commented Sep 25, 2020 •

edited