Bug 1303973
Summary: | ovirt-system-tests: ovirt engine installation fails because of wrong answer in the answer file | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [oVirt] ovirt-engine | Reporter: | Yaniv Kaul <ykaul> |
Component: | Setup.Core | Assignee: | Yaniv Kaul <ykaul> |
Status: | CLOSED UPSTREAM | QA Contact: | Pavel Stehlik <pstehlik> |
Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | 3.6.3 | CC: | bugs, dcaroest, didi |
Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Automation, CodeChange |
Target Release: | --- | Flags: | rule-engine:
planning_ack?
rule-engine: devel_ack? rule-engine: testing_ack? |
Hardware: | x86_64 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | 1302045 | Environment: | |
Last Closed: | 2016-03-24 18:18:06 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | External | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Yaniv Kaul
2016-02-02 15:05:14 UTC
The real issue is that we did not test the success of the installation. Proposed patch to the engine installation test: diff --git a/basic_suite_3.6/test-scenarios/001_initialize_engine.py b/basic_suite_3.6/test-scenarios/001_initialize_engine.py index 3347a1e..bc950ce 100644 --- a/basic_suite_3.6/test-scenarios/001_initialize_engine.py +++ b/basic_suite_3.6/test-scenarios/001_initialize_engine.py @@ -35,9 +35,16 @@ def test_initialize_engine(prefix): '/tmp/answer-file', ) - engine.ssh( + result = engine.ssh( [ 'engine-setup', '--config-append=/tmp/answer-file', ], ) + + testlib.assert_true_within_short( + lambda: False if result != 0 else True + ) + testlib.assert_true_within_long( + lambda: engine.service('ovirt-engine').alive() + ) David - where should I send this patch to? (In reply to Yaniv Kaul from comment #0) > How reproducible: > Always - though I'm not sure how it worked so far! A wild guess: Because of bug 1301902 The above code in comment 1 is a bit flawed - should check for result.code value. Replied by email |