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
pythonPackages.bjoern: init at 2.2.2 #45557
Conversation
@GrahamcOfBorg build pythonPackages.bjoern python3Packages.bjoern |
@CMCDragonkai You'd have to add yourself to https://github.com/NixOS/ofborg/blob/released/config.known-users.json. @GrahamcOfBorg build python2.pkgs.bjoern python3.pkgs.bjoern |
Success on x86_64-darwin (full log) Attempted: python2.pkgs.bjoern, python3.pkgs.bjoern Partial log (click to expand)
|
Success on x86_64-linux (full log) Attempted: python2.pkgs.bjoern, python3.pkgs.bjoern Partial log (click to expand)
|
Please provide an appropriate |
Success on aarch64-linux (full log) Attempted: python2.pkgs.bjoern, python3.pkgs.bjoern Partial log (click to expand)
|
As can be seen by the linked issue jonashaag/bjoern#140 There are only 2 automated tests, one of them doesn't work since I tried. And both are just scripts. Both scripts involve binding to localhost 127.0.0.1. Is this OK for running tests? I suppose if the build is happening in a "container" namespace, I'm not sure if the network itself is namespaced as well. |
@dotlambda The first test produces ugly messages that seem to a human user to cause errors, yet it appears that it's not considered a failure of the test itself. What do you think of such things? jonashaag/bjoern#140 (comment) Also I'm assuming that if a command returned back a non-exit code of 0, the |
@dotlambda I added one of the tests that doesn't cause ugly messages. |
On author's recommendations, redirected STDERR to |
buildInputs = [ libev ]; | ||
|
||
checkPhase = '' | ||
python tests/keep-alive-behaviour.py 2>/dev/null |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
${python.interpreter}
@FRidh Done. |
buildInputs = [ libev ]; | ||
|
||
checkPhase = '' | ||
${python.interpreter} tests/keep-alive-behaviour.py 2>/dev/null |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure it's wise to use 2>/dev/null
. Having some information when something goes wrong would be nice, wouldn't it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The proper way to silence these messages is to pipe the test's subprocesses' stderr to /dev/null, as suggested in the linked GitHub issue.
Asked this of the creator already. The messages that come out are all exceptions.
…On 11 September 2018 22:39:35 GMT+10:00, "Robert Schütz" ***@***.***> wrote:
dotlambda commented on this pull request.
> @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+{ stdenv, buildPythonPackage, fetchPypi, libev, python }:
+
+buildPythonPackage rec {
+ pname = "bjoern";
+ version = "2.2.2";
+
+ src = fetchPypi {
+ inherit pname version;
+ sha256 = "1w5z9agacci4shmkg9gh46ifj2a724rrgbykdv14830f7jq3dcmi";
+ };
+
+ buildInputs = [ libev ];
+
+ checkPhase = ''
+ ${python.interpreter} tests/keep-alive-behaviour.py 2>/dev/null
I'm not sure it's wise to use `2>/dev/null`. Having some information
when something goes wrong would be nice, wouldn't it?
--
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#45557 (review)
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
|
I'd like to get this merged. I wonder if there's any issues holding this up. |
Motivation for this change
Added bjoern. A screaming fast WSGI server!
Things done
sandbox
innix.conf
on non-NixOS)nix-shell -p nox --run "nox-review wip"
./result/bin/
)nix path-info -S
before and after)