fix missing spec repos

[fnxpt]

Probably not the best ruby code since I don't actively develop in ruby.

When doing pod install with a Podfile.lock already created, some of the spec repos might be skipped because the key already exists

Fixes #748

[fnxpt]

@dnkoutso can you check this one please?

[dnkoutso]

Hi @fnxpt can you add a test for this?

[dnkoutso]

Thanks for the PR!

[fnxpt]

Hey @dnkoutso sorry for the delay, I couldn't find any tests on that file... do you have any guidelines?

[PedroT172]

uuuummmm....

[dnkoutso]

@fnxpt the tests are called "specs" and the file you want is lockfile_spec.rb

[fnxpt]

Ok going to have a look at it today

[fnxpt]

sorry for the delay @dnkoutso. Im having issues setting the tests... Are you able to help?

[fnxpt]

@dnkoutso Finally fixed my environment to be able to run the tests but unfortunately Im getting a lot of errors on existing code. Is this only on my side or its really broken? I'm running rspec spec/lockfile_spec.rb. This is blocking our pipelines, is there a way we can have a beta version for this, until we have the tests fixed/implemented.

45 examples, 21 failures

Failed examples:

rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:129 # Pod::Lockfile In general stores the initialization hash
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:134 # Pod::Lockfile In general loads from a file
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:140 # Pod::Lockfile In general returns nil if it can't find the initialization file
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:145 # Pod::Lockfile In general returns the file in which is defined
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:151 # Pod::Lockfile In general raises if the provided YAML doesn't returns a hash
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:164 # Pod::Lockfile In general returns whether it is equal to another
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:173 # Pod::Lockfile In general returns the list of the names of the  installed pods
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:177 # Pod::Lockfile In general returns the versions of a given pod
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:183 # Pod::Lockfile In general returns the versions of a given pod handling the case in which the root spec was not stored                                                                                                                                
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:188 # Pod::Lockfile In general returns the spec repo of a given pod
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:194 # Pod::Lockfile In general returns the checksum for the given Pod
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:198 # Pod::Lockfile In general returns the dependencies used for the last installation
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:207 # Pod::Lockfile In general returns the spec repo sources
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:214 # Pod::Lockfile In general returns the spec repo sources when that section is missing
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:219 # Pod::Lockfile In general only includes root names in spec repo sources
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:231 # Pod::Lockfile In general includes the external source information in the generated dependencies
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:236 # Pod::Lockfile In general returns the dependency that locks the pod with the given name to the installed version                                                                                                                                     
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:243 # Pod::Lockfile In general raises if there is a request for a locking dependency for a not stored Pod
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:249 # Pod::Lockfile In general returns the version of CocoaPods which generated the lockfile
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:435 # Pod::Lockfile Serialization serializes correctly external dependencies
rspec ./spec/lockfile_spec.rb:599 # Pod::Lockfile Private helpers #generate_spec_repos sorts specs per spec repo by lowercase

[fnxpt]

@dnkoutso found the issue, running the wrong command. Added the test, please have a look

[biehl1]

Hi, can this be expedited somehow? We really need this too

[camisLuisa]

Thank you for the PR! It is really necessary.

[fnxpt]

@dnkoutso/ @amorde / @orta do you think we can merge this?

[santam85]

Encountered the same issue. Anything blocking this PR we can help with?

[fnxpt]

@dnkoutso can we merge this and include it on next version?

[biehl1]

Hi guys, anything missing to merge this one? Seems all green to go

[fnxpt]

Hey guys, what are the next steps, do I need to do anything extra? This PR is already approved for 2 weeks now and I would like to know when is it going to be merged.