Skip to content

New UDP tracker client for testing purposes#627

Merged
josecelano merged 1 commit intotorrust:developfrom
josecelano:625-add-a-new-udp-tracker-client-binary
Jan 19, 2024
Merged

New UDP tracker client for testing purposes#627
josecelano merged 1 commit intotorrust:developfrom
josecelano:625-add-a-new-udp-tracker-client-binary

Conversation

@josecelano
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@josecelano josecelano commented Jan 18, 2024 •
edited
Loading

You can use it with:

cargo run --bin udp_tracker_client 144.126.245.19:6969 9c38422213e30bff212b30c360d26f9a02136422

and the output should be something like:

AnnounceIpv4(
    AnnounceResponse {
        transaction_id: TransactionId(
            -888840697,
        ),
        announce_interval: AnnounceInterval(
            300,
        ),
        leechers: NumberOfPeers(
            0,
        ),
        seeders: NumberOfPeers(
            4,
        ),
        peers: [
            ResponsePeer {
                ip_address: xx.yy.zz.254,
                port: Port(
                    51516,
                ),
            },
            ResponsePeer {
                ip_address: xx.yy.zz.20,
                port: Port(
                    59448,
                ),
            },
            ResponsePeer {
                ip_address: xx.yy.zz.224,
                port: Port(
                    58587,
                ),
            },
        ],
    },
)

@josecelano josecelano force-pushed the 625-add-a-new-udp-tracker-client-binary branch from 519cbcd to 69b80ac Compare January 18, 2024 12:30
@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov bot commented Jan 18, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

Attention: 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (62fddba) 77.56% compared to head (f0710d3) 77.59%.

Files Patch % Lines
src/shared/bit_torrent/tracker/udp/client.rs 93.33% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files 
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop     #627      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    77.56%   77.59%   +0.02%     
===========================================
  Files          125      125              
  Lines         8337     8349      +12     
===========================================
+ Hits          6467     6478      +11     
- Misses        1870     1871       +1

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@josecelano josecelano force-pushed the 625-add-a-new-udp-tracker-client-binary branch from 69b80ac to 3c2b531 Compare January 18, 2024 12:58
@josecelano josecelano force-pushed the 625-add-a-new-udp-tracker-client-binary branch from 3c2b531 to 6934338 Compare January 18, 2024 13:13
@josecelano josecelano linked an issue Jan 18, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
Add a new UDP tracker client binary #625
Closed
@josecelano
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

josecelano commented Jan 18, 2024 •
edited
Loading

This binary prints the Rust struct instead of a JSON object like in the http_tracker_client.

This is because Aquatic does not implement serialize for responses (only bencode format).

I will keep it this way for the time being until I start working on the E2E tests. I plan to use this binary for E2E testing but maybe I can only use the exit code. It depends on the asserts. I can modify it later if the json format fits better or just to keep both clients similar.

It would also be nice to use the domain instead of the IP.

@josecelano
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

josecelano commented Jan 18, 2024 •
edited
Loading

ACK afc4731

@josecelano josecelano marked this pull request as ready for review January 18, 2024 13:20
@josecelano josecelano marked this pull request as draft January 18, 2024 13:26
@josecelano josecelano force-pushed the 625-add-a-new-udp-tracker-client-binary branch from 6934338 to b210edc Compare January 18, 2024 15:52
@josecelano josecelano force-pushed the 625-add-a-new-udp-tracker-client-binary branch from b210edc to afc4731 Compare January 18, 2024 15:55
@josecelano josecelano mentioned this pull request Jan 18, 2024
Closed
@josecelano josecelano self-assigned this Jan 18, 2024
@josecelano josecelano marked this pull request as ready for review January 18, 2024 16:03
@josecelano
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

josecelano commented Jan 18, 2024

I don't know why the code coverage report is failing. It's working on my local machine. I have to heck if I'm using the same Rust version.

@josecelano
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

josecelano commented Jan 18, 2024

I don't know why the code coverage report is failing. It's working on my local machine. I have to heck if I'm using the same Rust version.

By the way @WarmBeer I do not know why we are generating the code coverage report in two workflows. We have a specific workflow for code coverage. SHould we remove that step from the Testing workflow?

@josecelano
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

josecelano commented Jan 18, 2024

I don't know why the code coverage report is failing. It's working on my local machine. I have to heck if I'm using the same Rust version.

By the way @WarmBeer I do not know why we are generating the code coverage report in two workflows. We have a specific workflow for code coverage. SHould we remove that step from the Testing workflow?

Maybe it was because we wanted to see the report on the workflow execution log. But we can move the step to the coverage wirkflow.

@mickvandijke
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

mickvandijke commented Jan 19, 2024

I don't know why the code coverage report is failing. It's working on my local machine. I have to heck if I'm using the same Rust version.

By the way @WarmBeer I do not know why we are generating the code coverage report in two workflows. We have a specific workflow for code coverage. SHould we remove that step from the Testing workflow?

I did not setup the current workflow, so I do not know the need for two "code coverage" steps.

But it is weird that the first one passed while the second one in the Testing workflow didn't 😅.

@josecelano josecelano mentioned this pull request Jan 19, 2024
Closed
@josecelano
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

josecelano commented Jan 19, 2024

I don't know why the code coverage report is failing. It's working on my local machine. I have to heck if I'm using the same Rust version.

By the way @WarmBeer I do not know why we are generating the code coverage report in two workflows. We have a specific workflow for code coverage. SHould we remove that step from the Testing workflow?

I did not setup the current workflow, so I do not know the need for two "code coverage" steps.

But it is weird that the first one passed while the second one in the Testing workflow didn't 😅.

OK, I've opened a new issue: #628

By the way @WarmBeer, I intended to mention @da2ce7 who was the last one refactoring the workflows :-)

@josecelano
feat: [torrust#625] a new UDP tracker client
f0710d3 
You can use it with:

```console
cargo run --bin udp_tracker_client 144.126.245.19:6969 9c38422213e30bff212b30c360d26f9a02136422
```

and the output should be something like:

```
AnnounceIpv4(
    AnnounceResponse {
        transaction_id: TransactionId(
            -888840697,
        ),
        announce_interval: AnnounceInterval(
            300,
        ),
        leechers: NumberOfPeers(
            0,
        ),
        seeders: NumberOfPeers(
            4,
        ),
        peers: [
            ResponsePeer {
                ip_address: xx.yy.zz.254,
                port: Port(
                    51516,
                ),
            },
            ResponsePeer {
                ip_address: xx.yy.zz.20,
                port: Port(
                    59448,
                ),
            },
            ResponsePeer {
                ip_address: xx.yy.zz.224,
                port: Port(
                    58587,
                ),
            },
        ],
    },
)
```
@josecelano josecelano force-pushed the 625-add-a-new-udp-tracker-client-binary branch from afc4731 to f0710d3 Compare January 19, 2024 15:50
@josecelano josecelano added the Testing Checking Torrust label Jan 19, 2024
@josecelano josecelano added this to the v3.0.0 milestone Jan 19, 2024
@josecelano
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

josecelano commented Jan 19, 2024

ACK f0710d3

@josecelano josecelano merged commit 410e39e into torrust:develop Jan 19, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@mickvandijke mickvandijke Awaiting requested review from mickvandijke

@da2ce7 da2ce7 Awaiting requested review from da2ce7

Assignees

@josecelano josecelano

Labels

Testing Checking Torrust

Projects

Torrust Solution
Status: No status

Milestone

v3.0.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add a new UDP tracker client binary

2 participants

@josecelano @mickvandijke