Wil, I went ahead and re-worked the example specification.
Please take a look at the commit message and the way I'm setting an expectation that mocks the behavior of lookupvar for both Mac OS X and Linux. https://github.com/jeffmccune/puppetlabs-stdlib/tree/feature/master/has_interface_with $ rspec --format d spec/unit/puppet/parser/functions/has_interface_with_spec.rb function_has_interface_with On Mac OS X Systems should have loopback (lo0) should not have loopback (lo) On Linux Systems should have loopback (lo) should not have loopback (lo0) Finished in 0.04262 seconds 4 examples, 0 failures Please feel free to reply here if you have any questions. We might also want to consider moving this thread to puppet-dev since it's developing a new function. Hope this helps, -Jeff On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Jeff McCune <j...@puppetlabs.com> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:00 PM, Wil Cooley <wilcoo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I have been working on adding some predicate functions to puppetlabs-stdlib >> that test things based on 'interfaces' and related facts. > > Sweet! > >> The functions themselves seem to work fine in my manifest-based smoketests, >> but I am running into trouble that may or may not be due to my ignorance >> about rspec or Facter. Something needs to be done to initialize Facter >> because lookupvar('interfaces') just returns :undefined. I have not found >> any examples in the existing rspec tests; getvar_spec.rb seems like it >> should have something but the tests it does are pretty basic. > > In general, you should assume the spec_helper for stdlib will > initialize facter for you. In fact, you don't need to do require > 'facter' in your example specification. > >> You can see some of what I've been trying at >> https://github.com/wcooley/puppetlabs-stdlib/blob/master/spec/unit/puppet/parser/functions/has_interface_with_spec.rb > > Cool, I went ahead and pulled down your branch. If I might make a > suggestion, I notice you're developing on the "master branch" and you > have a number of commits that have not actually been merged into the > "master" branch of the puppetlabs repository. > > This situation of having two different branches, both named master, is > confusing and makes it a bit difficult to work with. > > When using Git, creating new branches is almost effortless. It's just > two commands. > > When you start hacking please create a topic branch: > > # Create a branch indicating this is a new feature based on master > having something to do with an interface function > git branch feature/master/has_interface_with_function origin/master > # Checkout the branch > git checkout feature/master/has_interface_with_spec > # Hack away > > It's also fairly easy to rename your current topic branch which is > named "master" > > # Rename your local master branch to a topic branch > git branch rename master feature/master/has_interface_with_function > > # Push the new name to your github repository > git push wcooley > feature/master/has_interface_with_function:feature/master/has_interface_with_function > > # Set your local topic branch to track the published copy of it. > git branch --set-upstream feature/master/has_interface_with_function > wcooley/feature/master/has_interface_with_function > > # Re-synchronize the Puppet Labs master branch (I assume origin is > git://github.com/puppetlabs/puppetlabs-stdlib.git) > git fetch origin > > # Create your local master tracking Puppet Labs master (These should > always be in sync. Don't commit on this branch...) > git branch master --track origin/master > > # Replace your own master branch on Github with the Puppet Labs master > branch (because it's not actually master right now) > git push wcooley +origin/master:master > > # Finally, work in your topic branch > git co feature/master/has_interface_with_function > >> Is there something obvious I'm missing? > > The setup looks to be quite strange. You shouldn't ever need to > define a get_scope method. I recommend looking at the > validate_re_spec.rb for a good example. > > I'm also re-working your topic branch in my own if you'd like to take > a look at the changes. > > -Jeff -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Users" group. To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to puppet-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
