-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 828
Improvements around docker in Playwright #12261
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Michael Telatynski <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Michael Telatynski <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Michael Telatynski <[email protected]>
…ernal` Signed-off-by: Michael Telatynski <[email protected]>
playwright/plugins/docker/index.ts
Outdated
process.stdout.write(log); | ||
process.stderr.write(log); |
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.
do we really need to log this twice? seems like it will be confusing to me.
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.
Its so you know in both log files which command a given line corresponds to, docker command output is not very descriptive and sometimes is just opaque IDs which are impossible to associate with the command issued.
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.
... which is maybe ok if they are going to log files, but not so much if they aren't.
[It feels like the problem here is that we have different logfiles for stdout and stderr in the first place. Does it even make sense for the stdout of a random docker command to end up in a different logfile to its stderr?]
Anyway fine let's not deal with that problem today. Write a comment saying that it's to deal with the case of having two logfiles, and move on.
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.
Playwright is the thing moving the process stdout/stderr into a file with seemingly no way to combine them, having a separate stdout/stderr file for the commands we run vs the rest of playwright will end up even more painful IMO
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.
Empirically they aren't going to a file when I run this at the commandline, but anyway this isn't a thing worth stressing over now.
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 guess they go into a file if you run with the HTML reporter, like we do in CI
Signed-off-by: Michael Telatynski <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Michael Telatynski <[email protected]>
When I run this at the commandline I see this:
... which I would say is Too Verbose. |
Oh yes, podman check also had pipe=false, will revert that behaviour |
Signed-off-by: Michael Telatynski <[email protected]>
Yeah I guess the |
Signed-off-by: Michael Telatynski <[email protected]>
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.
lgtm. Thanks for cleaning it up, and for your perseverance!
Signed-off-by: Michael Telatynski <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Michael Telatynski <[email protected]>
Split out from #12252
Review commit-by-commit