You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
On a system with some systemd issues, the outcome of host.service('myservice').is_valid is always False, even if my service is actually good.
On further investigation the original pull request to add this #265 added a check to make sure STDOUT and STDERR were emtpy, as the call to systemd-analyze verify %s always returns 0. However, in come cases, STDERR can contain unrelated information which trips up the comparison.
As an example, I have a deliberate typo in my service unit. The output of systemd-analyze verify myservice.service is as follows (all on STDERR):
snap-core18-2632.mount: Unit is bound to inactive unit dev-loop1.device. Stopping, too.
snap-snapd-18357.mount: Unit is bound to inactive unit dev-loop5.device. Stopping, too.
snap-snapd-17883.mount: Unit is bound to inactive unit dev-loop4.device. Stopping, too.
snap-core20-1828.mount: Unit is bound to inactive unit dev-loop7.device. Stopping, too.
/lib/systemd/system/myservice.service:17: Missing '=', ignoring line.
If I correct the typo, then the last line of this output goes away, but the others remain (actually, on my system the others seem to change every time I run the verify, but I always get at least a couple of lines out of it).
I'm not sure what's up with my system that it should do this (or why systemd would behave this way) but I'm wondering what the best solution to the testinfra problem is. I'm thinking a sort of "grep" of the output for myservice.service would suffice? Something like:
stderr = "".join(filter(lambda x: name in x, cmd.stderr.split()))
Or in place in the function in testinfra/modules/service.py (also taking the opportunity to add some output to explain the reason for the failure):
@property
def is_valid(self):
# systemd-analyze requires a full path.
if self.name.endswith(".service"):
name = self.name
else:
name = self.name + ".service"
cmd = self.run("systemd-analyze verify %s", name)
# A bad unit file still returns a rc of 0, so check the
# stdout for anything. Nothing means no warns/errors.
# Docs at https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd
# -analyze.html#Examples%20for%20verify
stderr = "".join(filter(lambda x: name in x, cmd.stderr.split()))
assert (cmd.stdout, stderr) == ("", ""), "service %s is not valid (see 'systemd-analyze verify %s' for details)" % (name, name)
return True
Happy to hear other suggestions or ideas etc :-)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Starting with Systemd version 250 system-analyze verify has a new option --recursive-errors to control the return code. Additionally it looks like system-analyze verify always returns an error "when syntax warnings arise during verification of the specified units or any of their dependencies.".
On a system with some systemd issues, the outcome of
host.service('myservice').is_valid
is alwaysFalse
, even if my service is actually good.On further investigation the original pull request to add this #265 added a check to make sure STDOUT and STDERR were emtpy, as the call to
systemd-analyze verify %s
always returns 0. However, in come cases, STDERR can contain unrelated information which trips up the comparison.As an example, I have a deliberate typo in my service unit. The output of
systemd-analyze verify myservice.service
is as follows (all on STDERR):If I correct the typo, then the last line of this output goes away, but the others remain (actually, on my system the others seem to change every time I run the verify, but I always get at least a couple of lines out of it).
I'm not sure what's up with my system that it should do this (or why systemd would behave this way) but I'm wondering what the best solution to the testinfra problem is. I'm thinking a sort of "grep" of the output for
myservice.service
would suffice? Something like:Or in place in the function in
testinfra/modules/service.py
(also taking the opportunity to add some output to explain the reason for the failure):Happy to hear other suggestions or ideas etc :-)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: