VR: fix wrong check when compare two configuration files

[weizhouapache]

Description

in some configuration files, the value can be set in multiple times and order matters.
For example there are two haproxy configurations

listen 10_0_xx_yy-22
	bind 10.0.xx.yy:22
	balance roundrobin

listen 10_0_xx_yy-23
	bind 10.0.xx.yy:23
	balance source

listen 10_0_xx_yy-22
	bind 10.0.xx.yy:22
	balance source

listen 10_0_xx_yy-23
	bind 10.0.xx.yy:23
	balance roundrobin

without this change, they are considered as same configuration, which is obviously wrong.

Types of changes

• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
• Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
• build/CI
• test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

• Major
• Minor

Bug Severity

• BLOCKER
• Critical
• Major
• Minor
• Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

[weizhouapache]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@weizhouapache a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 12.27%. Comparing base (1af4158) to head (cbfa59d).

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##               4.18    #9822     +/-   ##
===========================================
  Coverage     12.27%   12.27%             
- Complexity     9335     9336      +1     
===========================================
  Files          4699     4699             
  Lines        414691   414691             
  Branches      53409    51957   -1452     
===========================================
+ Hits          50891    50896      +5     
+ Misses       357475   357469      -6     
- Partials       6325     6326      +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	12.27% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 11380

[weizhouapache]

@blueorangutan test

[blueorangutan]

@weizhouapache a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests

[blueorangutan]

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-11683)
Environment: kvm-ol8 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server ol8
Total time taken: 45826 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr9822-t11683-kvm-ol8.zip
Smoke tests completed. 110 look OK, 1 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File
ContextSuite context=TestISOUsage>:setup	Error	0.00	test_usage.py

[DaanHoogland]

So this means that we no longer compare the set to be equal but the line by line items (in order). Is that really what we want @weizhouapache ?

[weizhouapache]

yes, we should compare lines by lines.

the method is being used to compare the configurations for

• haproxy
• conntrackd
• radvd

for all 3, I think the order of configurations in the files matters.