Add mocking of commands - closes #2 and #17 #20
Conversation
Remove local dependent code so that the index for creating new mocks is deterministic (0, 5, 10, ...).
| [[ -x "${output}/unlink" ]] | ||
| [[ -x "${output}/wc" ]] | ||
| [[ -x "${output}/which" ]] | ||
| [[ -x "${output}/xargs" ]] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess this list is specific to your machine, so perhaps a reduced set of commands would be enough to provide a decent test, so that this will pass even if run inside a plain Alpine docker image.
suggestion: date, ln, ls, sh, rm
| # Globals: | ||
| # BATS_TMPDIR | ||
| mock_teardown() { | ||
| rm -rf "${BATS_TMPDIR}"/bats-mock.$$.* |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I could not find a unit test for mock_teardown. I think it would be really easy to provide one
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I took the liberty of reviewing the basic code changes of this pull-request, although I am in no way affilliated with grayhemp/bats-mock project.
Would be fine if @grayhemp or another maintainer could review.
I might be misunderstanding, but for me it seems as I have to use this changeset to make mocks available inside each file under test.
(altough there may be easier workarounds, which I have not yet discovered.)
I like the approach that mock_create injects a symlink to the mock into the path loaded for the file under test.
Add an optional parameter to
mock_create [command]to mock commands.Adds following new functions:
mock_chrootto create a deterministic system setup. It does not usechown- if someone comes up with a better name, suggestions are welcome.path_overrideandpath_rmto manipulatePATHmock_teardownfor cleanup mock objectsI updated the documentation with some examples how those functions can be used.