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_cli.rb - fix bind port (9292 port in use errors) [changelog skip] #2316

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 30, 2020

Conversation

MSP-Greg
Copy link
Member

Description

Noticed intermittent test failures re 'port already in use' on port 9292, which is the default. Change two tests using it to use port 0, they aren't actually using as a client, but they are binding to it...

Your checklist for this pull request

  • I have reviewed the guidelines for contributing to this repository.
  • I have added an entry to History.md if this PR fixes a bug or adds a feature. If it doesn't need an entry to HISTORY.md, I have added [changelog skip] the pull request title.
  • I have added appropriate tests if this PR fixes a bug or adds a feature.
  • My pull request is 100 lines added/removed or less so that it can be easily reviewed.
  • If this PR doesn't need tests (docs change), I added [ci skip] to the title of the PR.
  • If this closes any issues, I have added "Closes #issue" to the PR description or my commit messages.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • All new and existing tests passed, including Rubocop.

@dentarg
Copy link
Member

dentarg commented Jul 22, 2020

Change two tests using it to use port 0

I remembered some previous discussion about "port 0" vs UniquePort.call, it happened in #2270, and it sounds like "port 0" is the future for Puma so 👍

@nateberkopec nateberkopec merged commit 57fca5c into puma:master Jul 30, 2020
@MSP-Greg MSP-Greg deleted the test-cli branch September 20, 2020 15:13
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.

None yet

3 participants