tests: Improve reporting in case of FS errors #2216
Conversation
If there are unreadable files in a directory, raise an error but continue with futher diagnostics, because the answer is in the script output.
denik
requested review from
pietern,
andrewnester and
shreyas-goenka
as code owners
| var files []string | ||
| err := filepath.Walk(src, func(path string, info os.FileInfo, err error) error { | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| t.Errorf("Error when listing %s: path=%s: %s", src, path, err) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you include a comment on why neither needs to t.FailNow()?
The returned value will be incomplete and additional asserts will run, potentially masking this underlying issue.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I tried :)
Title: If there are unreadable files in a directory, raise an error but continue with further diagnostics, because the answer is in the script output.
The output comparison is happening after this call which includes output.txt which includes errors printed by commands which include explanation why a given file cannot be read.
The returned value will be incomplete and additional asserts will run, potentially masking this underlying issue.
It is not masked, everything will be printed. We do not know which one is more relevant in advance. In my case latter was more relevant.
Changes
If there are unreadable files in a directory, raise an error but continue with further diagnostics, because the answer is in the script output.
Tests
Manually - I'm working on some tests that create unreadable files, the report is much better with this change.