Skip to content

Conversation

@avivkeller
Copy link
Member

NOTE: The test started as a child_process using these flags: [ '--report-on-fatalerror', '--report-on-signal', '--report-uncaught-exception', '--report-compact' ] Use NODE_SKIP_FLAG_CHECK to run the test with the original flags. ✔ Verify that the interaction between reportOnSignal and signal is correct. (1.468327ms) ✔ Verify that process.report.directory behaves properly (0.918158ms) ✔ Verify that process.report.filename behaves properly (0.20325ms) ✔ Verify that process.report.reportOnFatalError behaves properly (0.151694ms) ✔ Verify that process.report.reportOnUncaughtException behaves properly (0.275656ms) ✔ Verify that process.report.reportOnSignal behaves properly (0.164718ms) ✔ Verify that process.report.compact behaves properly (0.184926ms) ✔ Verify that process.report.excludeNetwork behaves properly (0.187271ms) ✔ Verify that process.report.signal behaves properly (0.750093ms) ℹ tests 9 ℹ suites 0 ℹ pass 9 ℹ fail 0 ℹ cancelled 0 ℹ skipped 0 ℹ todo 0 ℹ duration_ms 11.282749 

@nodejs-github-botnodejs-github-bot added needs-ci PRs that need a full CI run. report Issues and PRs related to process.report. test Issues and PRs related to the tests. labels Aug 26, 2024
@codecov
Copy link

codecovbot commented Aug 26, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 87.30%. Comparing base (4f1c27a) to head (1e749ca).
Report is 139 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #54571 +/- ## ========================================== - Coverage 87.33% 87.30% -0.03%  ========================================== Files 649 649 Lines 182620 182755 +135 Branches 35042 35046 +4 ========================================== + Hits 159490 159560 +70 - Misses 16394 16462 +68 + Partials 6736 6733 -3 

see 64 files with indirect coverage changes

@targos
Copy link
Member

We should find a better way to describe the changes if these refactorings become recurrent, because this is not using the test runner (which whould be node --test)

@cjihrig
Copy link
Contributor

Maybe say "node:test" instead of test runner as done in #54585 and similar PRs.

@atlowChemiatlowChemi added the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Aug 29, 2024
@github-actionsgithub-actionsbot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Aug 29, 2024
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@avivkeller
Copy link
MemberAuthor

commit message updated :-)

@cjihrigcjihrig added the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Aug 30, 2024
@github-actionsgithub-actionsbot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Aug 30, 2024
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@avivkeller
Copy link
MemberAuthor

CI is not passing. @jasnell and @anonrig appear to already be covering this base, so I'll close this.

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

needs-ciPRs that need a full CI run.reportIssues and PRs related to process.report.testIssues and PRs related to the tests.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@avivkeller@targos@cjihrig@nodejs-github-bot@jasnell@atlowChemi