General discussion about Chef

[chef] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Continuous Integration


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Chad Woolley < >
  • To:
  • Subject: [chef] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Continuous Integration
  • Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 21:36:38 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=ZfFN8wQ3lbwjQgiKVEkKb/vh/g+tlsMsEHOaqRhRaKBwyik5807T7fC2X23LEfYqgj LuPfZN0vQCftR0R9Y1X8YS75AihPpYtjmH/Zpu/JmMMj0tOglf9pzpGWBiPAE5HN0IRt kYkOuNmObgVtqVDxx393wFWXck3Wi8tMf6DJM=
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 9:14 PM, AJ Christensen 
< >
 wrote:
> It seems what we're all really talking about is some kind of BDD framework
> for Chef cookbooks - unit testing (also related to --noop) has proven
> unreliable for this kind of thing: you can't mock UNIX.
> I know there was work done on this in the past - mikehale's chef-bdd
> project http://github.com/mikehale/chef-bdd for example.

I don't get what that is for.  To only test the filesystem aspects of
cookbooks?  Does it somehow mock out other calls to run services and
such?  What about stuff like the hostname reference:

http://github.com/mikehale/chef-bdd/blob/master/features/step_definitions/custom_steps.rb#L17

Too bad there isn't a README...

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

§