Skip to content
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

ENT-9491: Fixed bug in double expansion of foreign list variables #5536

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jun 28, 2024

Conversation

@cf-bottom
Copy link

Thank you for submitting a PR! Maybe @craigcomstock can review this?

@larsewi larsewi force-pushed the expand branch 4 times, most recently from 222fcf5 to 3f1c774 Compare June 10, 2024 12:24
Ticket: None
Changelog: None
Signed-off-by: Lars Erik Wik <[email protected]>
Ticket: None
Changelog: None
Signed-off-by: Lars Erik Wik <[email protected]>
libpromises/iteration.c Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
@larsewi larsewi force-pushed the expand branch 3 times, most recently from 1ad9041 to ae785aa Compare June 19, 2024 14:15
libpromises/iteration.c Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
libpromises/iteration.c Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
libpromises/iteration.c Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
libpromises/iteration.c Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
libpromises/iteration.c Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
libpromises/iteration.c Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
libpromises/iteration.c Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
libpromises/iteration.c Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
libpromises/iteration.c Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
libpromises/iteration.c Fixed Show fixed Hide fixed
@larsewi larsewi changed the title Let's see what explodes now 💥 ENT-9491: Fixed bug in double expansion of foreign list variables Jun 27, 2024
@larsewi larsewi marked this pull request as ready for review June 27, 2024 12:05
Copy link
Contributor

@vpodzime vpodzime left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Very well done, sir! 👏 🍻 I'd just squash the last two commits because it doesn't make sense to cherry-pick one without the other. We would have to mark the test as soft-failing and then remove that together with the fix, but I think that's just extra unnecessary work.

Test output before fix looks like this:

```
R: /ntech/cfengine/core/tests/acceptance/01_vars/01_basic/double_expansion_list.cf FAIL
R: $($(parent_bundle).str) => EXPANDED
R: $($(parent_bundle).lst) => $(check.lst)
R: $(check.baz)            => EXPANDED
R: $($(parent_bundle)$lst) => EXPANDED
```

Ticket: ENT-9491
Changelog: None
Signed-off-by: Lars Erik Wik <[email protected]>
@larsewi larsewi added the cherry-pick? Fixes which may need to be cherry-picked to LTS branches label Jun 28, 2024
@larsewi larsewi removed the cherry-pick? Fixes which may need to be cherry-picked to LTS branches label Jun 28, 2024
@larsewi larsewi merged commit eb2dc66 into cfengine:master Jun 28, 2024
13 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants