Rietveld Code Review Tool
Help | Bug tracker | Discussion group | Source code | Sign in
(1058)

Issue 6533057: clean up lxc process management

Can't Edit
Can't Publish+Mail
Start Review
Created:
11 years, 7 months ago by hazmat
Modified:
11 years, 7 months ago
Reviewers:
mp+125333, SpamapS
Visibility:
Public.

Description

clean up lxc process management Adopted from ben's branch of the same name. Ensure better killing of processes on destroy env, and additionally expand scope to all services utilized by local env (ie file-server was still using upstart). Also ensures compatibility with dev branches since py path was previously being stripped. https://code.launchpad.net/~hazmat/juju/lxc-killpid/+merge/125333 (do not edit description out of merge proposal)

Patch Set 1 #

Total comments: 4
Unified diffs Side-by-side diffs Delta from patch set Stats (+200 lines, -141 lines) Patch
A [revision details] View 1 chunk +2 lines, -0 lines 0 comments Download
M juju/lib/service.py View 5 chunks +55 lines, -49 lines 0 comments Download
M juju/lib/tests/test_service.py View 3 chunks +56 lines, -28 lines 1 comment Download
M juju/providers/local/__init__.py View 2 chunks +4 lines, -2 lines 0 comments Download
M juju/providers/local/agent.py View 2 chunks +11 lines, -13 lines 0 comments Download
M juju/providers/local/files.py View 5 chunks +33 lines, -13 lines 0 comments Download
M juju/providers/local/tests/test_agent.py View 5 chunks +18 lines, -16 lines 2 comments Download
M juju/providers/local/tests/test_files.py View 7 chunks +21 lines, -20 lines 1 comment Download

Messages

Total messages: 2
hazmat
Please take a look.
11 years, 7 months ago (2012-09-19 20:35:15 UTC) #1
SpamapS
11 years, 7 months ago (2012-09-20 00:10:39 UTC) #2
All in all, looks pretty good. Just a few minor questions and cleanups. This
also addresses this bug:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1027537

Which is the only open bug in juju for Debian.

https://codereview.appspot.com/6533057/diff/1/juju/lib/tests/test_service.py
File juju/lib/tests/test_service.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/6533057/diff/1/juju/lib/tests/test_service.py#...
juju/lib/tests/test_service.py:91: 
I get why this is here, but it seems like we're asking for this to turn into an
unreliable test. Wouldn't os.wait make more sense?

https://codereview.appspot.com/6533057/diff/1/juju/providers/local/tests/test...
File juju/providers/local/tests/test_agent.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/6533057/diff/1/juju/providers/local/tests/test...
juju/providers/local/tests/test_agent.py:21: #print "intercept", args, kwargs
This, and the other commented out assertEquals appear to be accidental.

https://codereview.appspot.com/6533057/diff/1/juju/providers/local/tests/test...
juju/providers/local/tests/test_agent.py:67: #self.addCleanup(cleanup_root_file,
juju_directory)
And this one

https://codereview.appspot.com/6533057/diff/1/juju/providers/local/tests/test...
File juju/providers/local/tests/test_files.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/6533057/diff/1/juju/providers/local/tests/test...
juju/providers/local/tests/test_files.py:47: def xtest_upstart(self):
Any reason we're not just getting rid of this? I don't see the upstart specific
code coming back to the local provider any time soon. If anything, it will go in
juju.lib so both local and non-local agents can use it.
Sign in to reply to this message.

Powered by Google App Engine
RSS Feeds Recent Issues | This issue
This is Rietveld f62528b