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

Linux tests should cover more than Ubuntu Linux #3460

Closed
1 of 4 tasks
wfurt opened this issue Feb 23, 2023 · 6 comments
Closed
1 of 4 tasks

Linux tests should cover more than Ubuntu Linux #3460

wfurt opened this issue Feb 23, 2023 · 6 comments
Assignees
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@wfurt
Copy link
Member

wfurt commented Feb 23, 2023

Describe the bug

It seems like current test coverage only covers ubuntu-latest. The is problematic IMHO as OpenSSL differs on different distributions e.g. there is more than just OpenSSL 1.1 and 3.

We should probably cover at least following distributions as addition

This probably does not need to be full set. Platforms tests + some basic coverage should be sufficient IMHO

One can also take inspiration from https://github.com/dotnet/core/blob/main/release-notes/7.0/supported-os.md

Affected OS

  • Windows
  • Linux
  • macOS
  • Other (specify below)

Additional OS information

No response

MsQuic version

main

Steps taken to reproduce bug

run MsQuic on various linux distributions

Expected behavior

quic should load and function

Actual outcome

quic sometimes fails to load because of differences in OpenSSL library

Additional details

cc: @ManickaP @CarnaViire

@CarnaViire
Copy link
Member

We may also use this as an integration test platform between MsQuic and .NET. I've made some scripts to check the integration on minimalistic Docker images covering most of https://github.com/dotnet/core/blob/main/release-notes/8.0/supported-os.md -- the test installs the latest .NET daily build and MsQuic from packages.microsoft.com on Docker images and checks whether the lib at least loads to .NET properly (QuicConnection.IsSupported == true). It can be expanded to include some basic echo test.

I might be able to poke at this after we're done with .NET 8. I believe we wanted to have some integration testing within MsQuic CI pipeline even before, but we tried to approach it from a too complicated side.

@liveans
Copy link
Member

liveans commented Sep 30, 2024

We've done some work related to this in #4466, but should we close this as resolved or more work is necessary (like running unit tests etc. in different containers)?

/cc @wfurt @nibanks

@CarnaViire
Copy link
Member

Should we also add Alpine? @liveans
I believe it was not part of #4466 (and it's also mentioned here in the issue description).

@liveans
Copy link
Member

liveans commented Oct 1, 2024

Should we also add Alpine? @liveans I believe it was not part of #4466 (and it's also mentioned here in the issue description).

It was part of #4554, and completed recently, the only missing part for Alpine is ARM32, because dotnet is not working reliably over simulation on ARM32 Alpine.

@CarnaViire
Copy link
Member

Then it's all good, thanks!
IMO we can consider it done, and open a new issue if we would like to expand further.

@nibanks
Copy link
Member

nibanks commented Oct 1, 2024

Thanks so much for all the help on this!

@nibanks nibanks closed this as completed Oct 1, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
Status: Should be written
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants