[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Running 'pkd' in Nightly and Coverage Builds
[Thread Prev] | [Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Running 'pkd' in Nightly and Coverage Builds
- From: Jon Simons <jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Reply-to: libssh@xxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 08:07:45 -0800
- To: libssh@xxxxxxxxxx
>> How would I go about getting the 'pkd_hello' testcase running in the nightly >> and code coverage builds as found at https://test.libssh.org? Is this a >> matter of modifying some set of CMakefiles? I'd be happy to help get this >> test enabled in CI by default, including any fixups it may need to run in >> that environment. > > for this we need support for cwrap [1]. I've started to implement one test > with socket_wrapper. This allows us to start sshd with the config options we > need. Ah, I am confused here: why would we need either cwrap or 'sshd' for doing the testing that 'pkd_hello' already does? 'pkd' implements the server-side half of libssh-based pubkey auth and simple data transmission. There shouldn't be any reason to need to use preload-based testing here or to deal with any 'sshd', for the codepaths that 'pkd' tests. > Idea for pkd_hello: > > Create a tests/server directory. Move the pkd server to that directory and > start it with socket_wrapper. Then implement tests with cmocka ... The 'pkd' tests are already written using the cmocka headers and init/teardown functions: http://git.libssh.org/projects/libssh.git/tree/tests/pkd/pkd_hello.c#n405 It's not clear to me what we would gain by using a socket_wrapper to hook socket calls here? Just trying to understand the suggestion: why would we use that for this test? -Jon
Re: Running 'pkd' in Nightly and Coverage Builds | Andreas Schneider <asn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Running 'pkd' in Nightly and Coverage Builds | Jon Simons <jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Re: Running 'pkd' in Nightly and Coverage Builds | Andreas Schneider <asn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |