Skip to content

Use nix daemon in the test suite#9632

Merged
edolstra merged 2 commits intoNixOS:masterfrom
cole-h:nix-daemon-testing
Jan 19, 2024
Merged

Use nix daemon in the test suite#9632
edolstra merged 2 commits intoNixOS:masterfrom
cole-h:nix-daemon-testing

Conversation

@cole-h
Copy link
Member

@cole-h cole-h commented Dec 18, 2023

Motivation

As part of the CLI stabilization effort (#7701), the last remaining checkbox (at the moment) for nix daemon is that it "needs testing". This implements the proposal of using nix daemon in place of nix-daemon in the test suite.

Context

The box for nix daemon is unchecked, and this is supposedly the only thing blocking it, so I figured I'd propose the most minimal diff to address it.

I grepped for nix-daemon in the tests/ subdirectory -- hopefully I didn't miss anything.

Priorities and Process

Add 👍 to pull requests you find important.

The Nix maintainer team uses a GitHub project board to schedule and track reviews.

@cole-h cole-h requested a review from edolstra as a code owner December 18, 2023 19:29
@github-actions github-actions bot added the with-tests Issues related to testing. PRs with tests have some priority label Dec 18, 2023
@cole-h
Use nix daemon in the test suite
1f7b62f 
As part of the CLI stabilization effort, the last remaining checkbox (at
the moment) for `nix daemon` is that it "needs testing". This implements
the proposal of using `nix daemon` in place of `nix-daemon` in the test
suite.
@cole-h cole-h force-pushed the nix-daemon-testing branch from b471a69 to 1f7b62f Compare December 18, 2023 19:30
@thufschmitt
Copy link
Member

thufschmitt commented Dec 20, 2023

Thanks!

I don't think we can just replace nix-daemon by nix daemon everywhere, because we still want to test the old nix-daemon. That being said, I'm not sure why we need two different – but semantically equivalent – entry points for both: this one for nix-daemon and that one for nix daemon.

@edolstra, is there a reason why these are separate, or can we have nix-daemon piggyback on CmdDaemon?

@thufschmitt thufschmitt linked an issue Dec 20, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
Test the nix daemon command #9647
Closed
@edolstra
Copy link
Member

edolstra commented Dec 20, 2023

I think they're separate because originally we didn't have a single binary, so nix-daemon really was a separate executable. But I guess we can unify them now.

@thufschmitt
Copy link
Member

thufschmitt commented Dec 20, 2023

But I guess we can unify them now.

Yay!

How do we do that? (technically I mean)

@Ericson2314
Copy link
Member

Ericson2314 commented Dec 21, 2023

I don't get what is so surprising? I don't think we've ever tried to make a legacy command new-style before. Maybe it's fine in this case, but it does mean we have to be careful about modifying nix daemon if it will modify nix-daemon too.

@thufschmitt
Copy link
Member

thufschmitt commented Dec 22, 2023

@Ericson2314 : Nothing surprising, just a potential for simplification

@edolstra
Copy link
Member

edolstra commented Jan 12, 2024

@cole-h Maybe we can arbitrarily keep some of the calls to nix-daemon, so that both get tested.

@cole-h
Arbitrarily bring back some nix-daemon calls
bbcd9fc 
This means that both `nix daemon` and `nix-daemon` will be (somewhat)
tested.
@cole-h
Copy link
Member Author

cole-h commented Jan 13, 2024

I opted to keep nix daemon as the "overall" daemon for the tests and changed back a couple call sites to use nix-daemon again.

I wonder if it would be better to have another set of hydraJobs -- one for nix-daemon and one for nix daemon as the "overall" test daemon. This would essentially mean running the tests twice, of course, so I wonder if that might OK in the "near" term.

@roberth
Copy link
Member

roberth commented Jan 15, 2024

This would essentially mean running the tests twice

As you hinted, this strategy is quite expensive.
We could easily run a single tests/functional-style test twice, but we don't have one. All we have is tests that involve the daemon by coincidence, and a NixOS test about authorization, where it's not possible to pick a daemon command.

The right solution is to write a proper tests for the daemon command(s). If we don't merge their implementations, we can have two tiny tests that source the same test script.

@nixos-discourse
Copy link

nixos-discourse commented Jan 15, 2024

This pull request has been mentioned on NixOS Discourse. There might be relevant details there:

https://discourse.nixos.org/t/2021-01-11-nix-team-meeting-minutes-115/38277/1

@edolstra edolstra merged commit e6e160a into NixOS:master Jan 19, 2024
@cole-h cole-h deleted the nix-daemon-testing branch January 19, 2024 15:22
tebowy pushed a commit to tebowy/nix that referenced this pull request Jul 11, 2024
Merge pull request NixOS#9632 from cole-h/nix-daemon-testing
b6bb869 
Use `nix daemon` in the test suite

(cherry picked from commit e6e160a)
Change-Id: I537a25d3d48f609cd77b2c3a8ad68e87aebabfe8
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@edolstra edolstra Awaiting requested review from edolstra edolstra is a code owner

Assignees

@edolstra edolstra

Labels

with-tests Issues related to testing. PRs with tests have some priority

Projects

Nix team
Archived in project

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Test the nix daemon command

6 participants

@cole-h @thufschmitt @edolstra @Ericson2314 @roberth @nixos-discourse