Closed kyriediculous closed 4 years ago
Totals | |
---|---|
Change from base Build e4adf4e1-3d95-4969-8f2a-f80ae94a960a: | 0.0% |
Covered Lines: | 711 |
Relevant Lines: | 711 |
So the trufflecontract wrapper does have the notion of linking, but it's impossible to replace an existing library address which would be happening if we run the BondingManager.js tests on a network that isn't "unitTest" which is why CI fails.
This is due to the fact that the placeholder in the bytecode is replaced by the address; but this can only happen once.
And as far as I know the truffle wrapper around mocha doesn't give access to the network name used even though it's been requested a couple of times.
I propose keeping the original solution of ignoring the network name in the library migrations file despite it deploying that contract before every test.
386 skips migrations when using the
unitTest
network, but it also skips linkingDoublySortedLL
to theBondingManager
.This PR fixes the linking when using the
unitTest
network.To reproduce the issue check out #386 and run
./node_modules/.bin/truffle test test/unit/BondingManager.js --network=unitTest
The following error will be returned