rspec (2.0.0.beta.19)
rails (3.0.0)
authlogic (2.1.6)
bartt-ssl_requirement (1.2.3)
RUBYGEMS VERSION: 1.3.7
RUBY VERSION: 1.8.7 (2009-06-12 patchlevel 174) [i686-darwin10.4.0]
Hi,
I'm getting different results when running a Rails 3 scaffold generated
controller example depending on whether or not I run 'rspec spec' or 'rspec
spec/controllers'. The difference occurs when evaluating the dynamic route
methods with for '_url', e.g. my_model_url I'm using Authlogic and
SslRequirement as well. The issue may be in either of those libraries, but the
only difference is how I run the spec suite. I disable the Ssl requirement
check in the test.rb environment file.
Assume I generated the scaffold code with: "rails g scaffold scaffold" to
create a "Scaffold" model.
See relevant code here: http://gist.github.com/581130
When I run 'rspec spec/controllers', the example in question passes. I placed
debug code in url_for.rb (bartt-ssl_requirement-1.2.3) to parse the options
passed to url_for and they include the :host and :protocol parameters, :host
=>
"test.host", :protocol => "http://";.
When I run 'rspec spec', the example in question fails. The url_for options
are missing both the :host and :protocol parameters. If I manully pass those
into the my_model_url method, the example will pass. If I use the _path
version of the route method, the example passes.
The stack trace in the failing case is (path to gems directory omitted):
1) ScaffoldsController POST create with valid params redirects to the created
scaffold
Failure/Error: response.should redirect_to(scaffold_url(mock_scaffold))
Missing host to link to! Please provide :host parameter or set
default_url_options[:host]
# .../actionpack-3.0.0/lib/action_dispatch/routing/route_set.rb:473:in
`url_for_without_non_ssl_host'
# .../bartt-ssl_requirement-1.2.3/lib/url_for.rb:44:in
`url_for_without_secure_option'
# .../gems/bartt-ssl_requirement-1.2.3/lib/url_for.rb:32:in `url_for'
# .../actionpack-3.0.0/lib/action_dispatch/routing/url_for.rb:132:in
`url_for'
# .../actionpack-3.0.0/lib/action_dispatch/routing/route_set.rb:195:in
`factor_library_url'
# ./spec/controllers/scaffolds_controller_spec.rb:70
# .../activesupport-3.0.0/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:239:in `inject'
So, I'm stumped as to why 'rspec spec' is behaving differently from 'rspec
spec/controllers' with respect to generating the appropriate url_for options.
Thanks!
Michael_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
