[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-bugs] #17076 [Tor]: Improve coverage on src/or/config.c (options_validate)
#17076: Improve coverage on src/or/config.c (options_validate)
----------------------------------+------------------------------------
Reporter: rjunior | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: reopened
Priority: Medium | Milestone: Tor: 0.2.8.x-final
Component: Tor | Version:
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: testing, 028-triaged | Actual Points:
Parent ID: | Points: small
Sponsor: SponsorS |
----------------------------------+------------------------------------
Changes (by teor):
* status: closed => reopened
* resolution: fixed =>
Comment:
The way these tests are implemented makes it hard to add new options.
Testing an option requires a developer to specify a set of options that
silence all potential warnings or rejections before the option being
tested. Several tests count a specific number of warnings, or locate a
warning by its position in the log.
This means that adding new option can break existing tests. And writing
unit tests for a new option requires significant effort.
I suggest we revise these tests to:
* never rely on a specific option count or log message position
* instead, search the entire log for the message, and assert that it's
been found somewhere in it
* never rely on the developer to choose a set of default options that
validate correctly
* instead, supply a set of default options that validate correctly at
the top of the file, and use them throughout the file, overriding
individual options as needed
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/17076#comment:29>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online
_______________________________________________
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs