export checksum code #188
Merged
export checksum code #188
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Thanks for referencing the PR where you're using this @SwampDragons! It helps to see how it looks in action. I don't see an issue in exporting this either - the only thing that I'd like to see is comments adjusted to reflect the new export as well, in addition to |
|
Awesome. I can do those. Also, re: test failures, I've opened #189 to fix this bitbucket failure. |
|
Beauty! Thanks for taking care of that too! |
vancluever
approved these changes
Jun 27, 2019
SwampDragons
force-pushed
the
export_checksum_file_code
branch
from
7ffa167 to
025d982
Compare
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Adrien wrote code to allow the go-getter to handle checksums from files, so that Packer didn't need to handle file checksums in its own internal logic. But we missed a "fun" edge case where we were using the checksum information pulled from that file to decide whether or not to upload a file to a vmware esxi machine.
Packer needs to be able to access the actual checksums contained within the file. The only way to do that apart from re-implementing all of the file parsing code from go-getter for this one edge case is to allow the client to call the checksum extraction directly.
I don't think making this method exported is a particularly bad thing, but I'd appreciate a sanity check... maybe from @vancluever who reviewed the original checksum file code.
FWIW I've tested this change within Packer and it does solve my issue.