Support for FreeBSD > 6 is missing from iputil.py #1098
Labels
No Label
0.2.0
0.3.0
0.4.0
0.5.0
0.5.1
0.6.0
0.6.1
0.7.0
0.8.0
0.9.0
1.0.0
1.1.0
1.10.0
1.10.1
1.10.2
1.10a2
1.11.0
1.12.0
1.12.1
1.13.0
1.14.0
1.15.0
1.15.1
1.2.0
1.3.0
1.4.1
1.5.0
1.6.0
1.6.1
1.7.0
1.7.1
1.7β
1.8.0
1.8.1
1.8.2
1.8.3
1.8β
1.9.0
1.9.0-s3branch
1.9.0a1
1.9.0a2
1.9.0b1
1.9.1
1.9.2
1.9.2a1
LeastAuthority.com automation
blocker
cannot reproduce
cloud-branch
code
code-dirnodes
code-encoding
code-frontend
code-frontend-cli
code-frontend-ftp-sftp
code-frontend-magic-folder
code-frontend-web
code-mutable
code-network
code-nodeadmin
code-peerselection
code-storage
contrib
critical
defect
dev-infrastructure
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
fixed
invalid
major
minor
n/a
normal
operational
packaging
somebody else's problem
supercritical
task
trivial
unknown
was already fixed
website
wontfix
worksforme
No Milestone
No Assignees
2 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Reference: tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25#1098
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s(<nil>)"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
On tahoe-dev, Randy Bush reported the following error when running a Tahoe node under FreeBSD 8.0.
Attachment iputil-freebsd.diff.dpatch (47066 bytes) added
I don't see any easy way to implement meaningful tests for this change. It's probably better to have a new buildbot running a recent FreeBSD version.
What do you think?
I would be willing to apply this based on Randy Bush's FreeBSD 8 buildbot.
It would be even cooler to do a "mock out the underlying platform" hack like the way you, François, wrote portable unit tests of your unicode work. The unit tests could make
sys.platform
say "FreeBSD10" or something and then when iputil.py callsgetProcessOutput()
the test could patch outgetProcessOutput()
to return a sensible thing that looks like the output of "ifconfig -a" on FreeBSD 10.Replying to zooko:
Zooko, I knew you'd be saying that ;)
I'll have a look into that.
This seems like a very safe patch that should be applied for 1.7.1, regardless of the absence of tests.
Oh all right. For the record, I still want a deterministic mockery-based unit test and I still want Randy's FreeBSD buildslave to go green:
http://tahoe-lafs.org/buildbot/waterfall?show=Randy%20FreeBSD-amd64
But I guess this patch is extremely unlikely to cause a regression. :-)
applied in changeset:968edfda119cb29c. Thanks!