Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  enhancement  | Status:  closed
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august asn- |  Actual Points:  1.5
  merge  |
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-
Changes (by asn):

 * status:  merge_ready => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


Comment:

 Merged!

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  enhancement  | Status:
 |  merge_ready
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august asn- |  Actual Points:  1.5
  merge  |
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-
Changes (by nickm):

 * keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august => network-team-roadmap-august
 asn-merge
 * status:  needs_revision => merge_ready


Comment:

 Replying to [comment:20 teor]:
 > This looks great - I'm really happy with this level of testing.
 >
 > It looks like we're testing a lot of non-default options.
 > Did we try to test them all?

 I tried to avoid testing options, options that don't work on windows, and
 authority-only options.

 > Should we open a ticket for the tricky ones that we couldn't test?
 > HardwareAccel
 > ControlSocket
 > ControlSocketWriteable
 > Or are we just trying for a decent level of coverage right now?

 I was just trying for a decent level of coverage here.  I've opened #31756
 for this.

 > I'm happy to merge, if these tests also pass on 0.4.1.
 > (Or if there is a good explanation for why they don't pass, like a new
 option.)
 > That way, we can be sure that we aren't just testing the post-refactor
 behaviour.
 >
 > Feel free to flip to merge_ready once 0.4.1 passes.

 The tests pass for 0.4.1, with one exception: the large_1 test gives its
 output lines in a different order, since we previously didn't sort the
 options before writing them out.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  enhancement  | Status:  needs_revision
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:  1.5
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-
Changes (by teor):

 * status:  needs_review => needs_revision


Comment:

 This looks great - I'm really happy with this level of testing.

 It looks like we're testing a lot of non-default options.
 Did we try to test them all?

 Should we open a ticket for the tricky ones that we couldn't test?
 HardwareAccel
 ControlSocket
 ControlSocketWriteable
 Or are we just trying for a decent level of coverage right now?

 I'm happy to merge, if these tests also pass on 0.4.1.
 (Or if there is a good explanation for why they don't pass, like a new
 option.)
 That way, we can be sure that we aren't just testing the post-refactor
 behaviour.

 Feel free to flip to merge_ready once 0.4.1 passes.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  enhancement  | Status:  needs_review
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:  1.5
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by teor):

 As an aside, I wonder if we can implement a test for #31408 using this
 framework?

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  enhancement  | Status:  needs_review
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:  1.5
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-
Changes (by nickm):

 * status:  new => needs_review
 * actualpoints:   => 1.5


Comment:

 CI has passed.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  enhancement  | Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by nickm):

 I've opened a new branch, `ticket31637`, which squashes all of the work
 above.  PR at https://github.com/torproject/tor/pull/1324 .  I expect that
 the CI will still pass, but you never know.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  enhancement  | Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by nickm):

 >> * Open a ticket to change how relative paths are interpreted by
 %include.
 > Yes I think we should do this long-term.

 I've opened #31737 for this.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  enhancement  | Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by teor):

 Replying to [comment:14 nickm]:
 > Okay, I did a less big test suite than I had expected here, but I
 believe it covers +Option and /Option.
 >
 > I'm not sure how exactly to make it handle `%include` though -- The
 problem is that `%include` relative paths are apparently interpreted
 relative to Tor's cwd.

 Oh dear. I thought we tried to stop using the cwd for everything.

 Maybe we should open a ticket to run tests from an empty temp cwd, so we
 catch issues like this in future.

 > I think my options are:
 >   * Defer integration testing for `%include` directives.

 Adds risk to refactoring, let's try something else first.

 >   * Make sure that the test script runs from a known location inside the
 source directory.

 Good idea, and probably something we want to do for test stability anyway.

 >   * Add a step to generate the `%include` paths in our examples before
 we run the test scripts.

 Yeah let's not unless we have to: unless we get that step exactly right,
 it could cause instability or failures.

 >   * Open a ticket to change how relative paths are interpreted by
 `%include`.

 Yes I think we should do this long-term.

 > I think that the second idea is reasonable for now, but the fourth might
 be what we want to do long-term.  What do you think?

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  enhancement  | Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by nickm):

 Okay, I did a less big test suite than I had expected here, but I believe
 it covers +Option and /Option.

 I'm not sure how exactly to make it handle `%include` though -- The
 problem is that `%include` relative paths are apparently interpreted
 relative to Tor's cwd.  I think my options are:
   * Defer integration testing for `%include` directives.
   * Make sure that the test script runs from a known location inside the
 source directory.
   * Add a step to generate the `%include` paths in our examples before we
 run the test scripts.
   * Open a ticket to change how relative paths are interpreted by
 `%include`.

 I think that the second idea is reasonable for now, but the fourth might
 be what we want to do long-term.  What do you think?

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  enhancement  | Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by nickm):

 I've messed around with the branch and tried to fix the issues -- then I
 tried to fix the issues caused by fixing those issues .

 I'm going to start writing a nice big test suite here.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  enhancement  | Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by nickm):

 Replying to [comment:10 teor]:
 > I like this idea.
 > I also think it could replace some of the repetitive parts of
 test_options.c
 >
 > I have some questions about the design:
 > 1. Should we name the tests, rather than numbering them?

 I think we should.

 > 2. Will we ever have enough tests that we want to split tests into
 categories, and put each category of tests in its own directory?

 Possibly. I think that should be an easy change to make later, if we
 decide to do so.  We'd just replace a "*" with a "*/*", and do a "git mv"
 command.

 > 3. Are there any tests that we can't do using this framework?
 >   a) We can't test the basic "missing torrc, missing defaults torrc, no
 command line args" case, because the script supplies an empty file,
 instead of a missing defaults torrc

 That's right.  I think this kind of test would do better in
 test_cmdline.sh.

 >   b) We can't do tests that expect error on some platforms, but success
 on others (is "Sandbox 1" an example of this kind of test?)

 There are some options like this; I don't think that `Sandbox 1` is one of
 them.  (For me, it passes --verify-config on OSX.)

 We could extend the script later on if needed to accomodate this -- for
 example, by having it check for "expected.linux" and "error.osx".  But I
 think I'd like to see how far we get with the first version of the script.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  enhancement  | Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-
Changes (by teor):

 * status:  needs_review => new
 * type:  defect => enhancement


Comment:

 I like this idea.
 I also think it could replace some of the repetitive parts of
 test_options.c

 I have some questions about the design:
 1. Should we name the tests, rather than numbering them?
 2. Will we ever have enough tests that we want to split tests into
 categories, and put each category of tests in its own directory?
 3. Are there any tests that we can't do using this framework?
   a) We can't test the basic "missing torrc, missing defaults torrc, no
 command line args" case, because the script supplies an empty file,
 instead of a missing defaults torrc
   b) We can't do tests that expect error on some platforms, but success on
 others (is "Sandbox 1" an example of this kind of test?)

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  enhancement  | Status:  new
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by teor):

 Oh I also put some detailed comments on the pull request.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  defect   | Status:  needs_review
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-
Changes (by nickm):

 * status:  assigned => needs_review


--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  defect   | Status:  assigned
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by nickm):

 Okay, I've got something that works.  See notes above: It's not ready to
 merge, but I'd like to know how the approach looks to you.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  defect   | Status:  assigned
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by nickm):

 (I'm currently wrestling with appveyor to try work around CRLF issues.
 Any advice here would be welcome)

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  defect   | Status:  assigned
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:  teor |Sponsor:
-+-
Changes (by nickm):

 * reviewer:   => teor


--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  defect   | Status:  assigned
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:   |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by nickm):

 I've started a shell script that will be useful for this, and maybe also
 for parts of #31631.

 It isn't done yet!  I've only written the script and a few example tests
 for it -- I need to write a bunch more tests before I can call this done,
 and also I need to write a changes file.  But before I more ahead, I'd
 like to know what you think of this approach.  No need to do a full review
 now: I just want to know whether you think I should proceed with this line
 of work.

 The branch is `ticket31637_wip`. PR at
 https://github.com/torproject/tor/pull/1320 .

 (WRT #31631: It tests configuration round-trips, but not state or
 sr_disk_state.)

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  defect   | Status:  assigned
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:   |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by nickm):

 The `--dump-config` command-line option for Tor will be useful for this.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  defect   | Status:  assigned
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:   |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by nickm):

 There are some tests for %include in src/test/test_config.c, but it would
 be good to have integration tests there too.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  defect   | Status:  assigned
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:   |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by nickm):

 FWIW, the current tests for + and / are in
 test_confparse_reassign_extend().  It would be good to have integration
 tests too.

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Re: [tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
-+-
 Reporter:  teor |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  defect   | Status:  assigned
 Priority:  Medium   |  Milestone:  Tor:
 |  0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor |Version:
 Severity:  Normal   | Resolution:
 Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august  |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:  #29211   | Points:
 Reviewer:   |Sponsor:
-+-

Comment (by teor):

 Maybe we should also test %include?

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

[tor-bugs] #31637 [Core Tor/Tor]: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across defaults, torrc, command line

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#31637: Make sure we have test coverage for Option, +Option and /Option across
defaults, torrc, command line
--+-
 Reporter:  teor  |  Owner:  nickm
 Type:  defect| Status:  assigned
 Priority:  Medium|  Milestone:  Tor: 0.4.2.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor  |Version:
 Severity:  Normal|   Keywords:  network-team-roadmap-august
Actual Points:|  Parent ID:  #29211
   Points:|   Reviewer:
  Sponsor:|
--+-
 The tor man page says:

 By default, an option on the command line overrides an option found in
 the configuration file, and an option in a configuration file overrides
 one in the defaults file.

 This rule is simple for options that take a single value, but it can
 become complicated for options that are allowed to occur more than once:
 if you specify four SocksPorts in your configuration file, and one more
 SocksPort on the command line, the option on the command line will replace
 all of the SocksPorts in the configuration file. If this isn’t what you
 want, prefix the option name with a plus sign (+), and it will be appended
 to the previous set of options instead. For example, setting SocksPort
 9100 will use only port 9100, but setting +SocksPort 9100 will use ports
 9100 and 9050 (because this is the default).

 Alternatively, you might want to remove every instance of an option in
 the configuration file, and not replace it at all: you might want to say
 on the command line that you want no SocksPorts at all. To do that, prefix
 the option name with a forward slash (/). You can use the plus sign (+)
 and the forward slash (/) in the configuration file and on the command
 line.

 Where are our tests for this specification, and do they have the coverage
 we need to test this refactor?

--
Ticket URL: 
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki 
The Tor Project: anonymity online
___
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs