-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 35
Shellcheck server stat #290
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Shellcheck server stat #290
Conversation
|
All the output I've pasted is from my branch, and is identical to the output from the current serverStat. No urgency to review this, but I would appreciate guidance on further testing this important script. |
|
Yeah this is one of the more important scripts so we need to do some diligence |
|
I suspect what we need to do for robust testing here is:
I'll review the code at least now |
ZLLentz
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
All the shellcheck edits seem clean/clear/correct
We need to pick a server to mess with, maybe the maker space ctl servers are good targets
|
@ZLLentz I tried the non-power commands on ctl-tst-dev-03 (status, console, expert) and the power-related commands (off, on, cycle, and reset) on ctl-tst-dev-02, all successfully. Any suggestion on who else should look at this? |
|
Aside: I find it disorienting that the subcommand comes after the server argument |
|
I'm going to request a review from the new @pcdshub/engtools-team that I forgot to merge in #291 and I forgot to announce, I think I'd like one more person to confirm we're good to go here. I will put my approval on and wait for one more. |
ZLLentz
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Approving, I think this has been tested enough and looks good.
+1 more approval from engtools-team would be enough to merge I think
|
The server name is the first argument as it default (or at least should default to 'status') and I was too lazy check for the number of arguments and change how the first argument is used depending on that and/or good enough to just use -- or so. |
silkenelson
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe enough tests have been done.
Sorry for taking such a long time that you now have to clean up merge conflicts.
c56231a
|
Merge conflict was easy to fix. I tested it by doing serverStat expert on an unpingable fez, a pingable fez, and a server without a fez netconfig entry. |
Description
Motivation and Context
https://jira.slac.stanford.edu/browse/ECS-5216
How Has This Been Tested?
Interactively. latest-released serverStat has identical output to below
Where Has This Been Documented?