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

sharness: don't run go-ipfs instance with default config #3526

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 21, 2016

Conversation

Kubuxu
Copy link
Member

@Kubuxu Kubuxu commented Dec 21, 2016

It conflicts with already running instance on the Dev's machine so
running this test requires disabling the normal ipfs.

The launch of ipfs here doesn't test much as we compare the config,
after initing from it and we also launch from default config in many
other cases (with few variables changed to not conflict with already
running standalone ipfs instance).

It conflicts with already running instance on the Dev's machine so
running this test requires disabling the normal ipfs.

The launch of ipfs here doesn't test much as we compare the config,
after initing from it and we also launch from default config in many
other cases (with few variables changed to not conflict with already
running standalone ipfs instance).

License: MIT
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sztandera <[email protected]>
@Kubuxu Kubuxu added the status/in-progress In progress label Dec 21, 2016
@Kubuxu Kubuxu requested review from a user and whyrusleeping December 21, 2016 18:45
Copy link
Member

@whyrusleeping whyrusleeping left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, kinda weird to be removing tests, but youre right that this doesnt do much and is tested elsewhere.

@whyrusleeping whyrusleeping merged commit 41744ef into master Dec 21, 2016
@whyrusleeping whyrusleeping deleted the fix/sharness/init-test branch December 21, 2016 19:18
@whyrusleeping whyrusleeping removed the status/in-progress In progress label Dec 21, 2016
@ghost ghost mentioned this pull request Dec 23, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants