Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

test: configure wireguard server side using the browser object #19489

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 16, 2023
Merged

test: configure wireguard server side using the browser object #19489

merged 1 commit into from
Oct 16, 2023

Conversation

subhoghoshX
Copy link
Member

Follow up of #19024

@subhoghoshX subhoghoshX force-pushed the wireguard-server-using-browser branch from 4d48175 to a38f571 Compare October 16, 2023 11:10
@subhoghoshX
Copy link
Member Author

Looks I introduced a flake...

@subhoghoshX subhoghoshX force-pushed the wireguard-server-using-browser branch from a38f571 to 146aad3 Compare October 16, 2023 12:26
martinpitt
martinpitt previously approved these changes Oct 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@martinpitt martinpitt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks! Looks like it's on its way to green, these failures are stupid/unrelated (transient network outage?)

test/verify/check-networkmanager-wireguard Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@subhoghoshX subhoghoshX force-pushed the wireguard-server-using-browser branch from 146aad3 to aed3d50 Compare October 16, 2023 13:36
martinpitt
martinpitt approved these changes Oct 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@martinpitt martinpitt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

martinpitt
martinpitt requested changes Oct 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@martinpitt martinpitt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah dang, this is failing now. 😢

@subhoghoshX subhoghoshX force-pushed the wireguard-server-using-browser branch from aed3d50 to 9757b8f Compare October 16, 2023 14:41
@subhoghoshX
Copy link
Member Author

subhoghoshX commented Oct 16, 2023 •
edited
Loading

I think b2.login_and_go("/network") and m2.execute(f"firewall-cmd --add-port={m2_port}/udp") immediately one after the other causes it. Hence, the Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'ports') error.

I believed login_and_go() waits for page to finish loading before moving on.

@subhoghoshX
Copy link
Member Author

Upon thinking, I guess it makes sense that it's not possible to know when all the parts of a page finished loading...

The networking scenario passed 🎉 but others are failing, I guess they're unrelated(?).

@martinpitt
Copy link
Member

Yes, they are. This is cockpit-project/bots#5395 , I'll send a PR to update the naughty. this is a known flake, see PR #19328

martinpitt
martinpitt approved these changes Oct 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@martinpitt martinpitt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks! This looks very clean now.

@martinpitt martinpitt merged commit 7fce279 into cockpit-project:main Oct 16, 2023
35 checks passed
@subhoghoshX subhoghoshX mentioned this pull request Oct 17, 2023
Merged
6 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@martinpitt martinpitt martinpitt approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@subhoghoshX @martinpitt