Closed olwins closed 4 months ago
You should adjust the commit message.
See https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/how-to-write-better-git-commit-messages/
and conclude with an extra line fixes #xyz
.
I hope it good now :
Regarding the build failure for some of them it look like the gpg key doesn’t exist ? gpg: WARNING: nothing exported
not sure how to fix that
I can add a test like that, to not fail for the build where the gpg key is missing . But I don't know if that a good idea or not
if expect_succ gpg --list-keys pulp-fixture-signing-key
then
expect_succ pulp deb remote update --name "${ENTITIES_NAME}" --gpgkey "$(gpg --armor --export 'pulp-fixture-signing-key')"
expect_succ pulp deb remote show --name "${ENTITIES_NAME}"
assert "$(echo "$OUTPUT" | jq -r .gpgkey)" == "$(gpg --armor --export 'pulp-fixture-signing-key')"
fi
I can add a test like that, to not fail for the build where the gpg key is missing . But I don't know if that a good idea or not
if expect_succ gpg --list-keys pulp-fixture-signing-key then expect_succ pulp deb remote update --name "${ENTITIES_NAME}" --gpgkey "$(gpg --armor --export 'pulp-fixture-signing-key')" expect_succ pulp deb remote show --name "${ENTITIES_NAME}" assert "$(echo "$OUTPUT" | jq -r .gpgkey)" == "$(gpg --armor --export 'pulp-fixture-signing-key')" fi
Let's keep that as a last resort only.
OK, again about the test failures. The coincide to happen on the runners with lower bounds=True. That means we install an older version of pulp-cli and with it i believe a version of the pulp-cli pytest plugin that does not provide the same gpg environment to the tests. Can you skip this part based on the pulp-cli version?
Version test added, I hope that fine :) ( I was hoping to be able to use pulp debug has-plugin, but the cli is not listed there) So my check is a little longer
Fix #108