S --
I'm currrently looking at the specs for the ssh_authorized_key provider. >> There are two tests that give me a headache: >> >> it "should create the directory if it doesn't exist" do >> File.stubs(:exist?).with(@dir).returns false >> Dir.expects(:mkdir).with(@dir,0700) >> @provider.flush >> end >> >> it "should not create or chown the directory if it already exist" do >> File.stubs(:exist?).with(@dir).returns false >> Dir.expects(:mkdir).never >> @provider.flush >> end >> >> Both tests stub exist? to return false (which is obviously wrong in the >> second case) but both tests are expecting different results. Nevertheless >> both tests will pass. Am I overlooking something? How can this happen? >> > > Wow. I'll deffer to Luke on the "what to do about it" issue but apart from > that this look like another rspec bug (along the lines of the > be_any/all/none... bug, http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/197643) but I'm > not seeing the mechanism off the top of my head. > > It's probably worth figuring out if only to identify other tests that might > not be doing what they look like, > It looks like 1) the tests are stubbing Dir.mkdir and 2) expects are silently ignored on stubs so 3) the problematic lines simply aren't doing what they look like. -- M ----------------------------------------------------------- When in trouble or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout. -- 1920's parody of the maritime general prudential rule ------------------------------------------------------------ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-dev@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.
