-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
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
integration tests: test that lndk forwards onion message #76
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just read through this - looks good! Will wait on #77 to take a proper look.
If you'd like to pull out the refactor + log4rs commits out, we can put those in separately to itest changes.
@carlaKC, sounds good, so pull those commits into a separate PR? |
Yeah if you want to get them in sooner? But happy either way. |
9dd2290
to
edee3f2
Compare
edee3f2
to
c51022c
Compare
399624a
to
e88f601
Compare
Move the logic for running lndk into a lib.rs so we can import it in the integration tests.
e88f601
to
a46a901
Compare
Cool no rush so I'll just leave it in this one :) Just rebased this on master btw. |
Codecov ReportAttention:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #76 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 58.69% 0.00% -58.70%
==========================================
Files 5 1 -4
Lines 983 12 -971
==========================================
- Hits 577 0 -577
+ Misses 406 12 -394
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
let (_bitcoind, mut lnd, ldk1, ldk2, lndk_dir) = | ||
common::setup_test_infrastructure(test_name).await; | ||
|
||
// Here we'll produce a little path of two channels. Both ldk nodes are connected to lnd like so: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
reminder for self: this should say "connections" not "channels"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
tACK - everything is working as expected and locally ran the itests. Nice stuff!
Added some nits for it we follow this up, but don't need to be addressed now.
src/lib.rs
Outdated
use std::str::FromStr; | ||
use tonic_lnd::lnrpc::GetInfoRequest; | ||
|
||
pub async fn run(args: LndCfg) -> Result<(), ()> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
(Pre-existing) I think that we need to do a more general errors followup, so not for this PR but I think that this should return a defined error.
@@ -1,2 +1,2 @@ | |||
/target | |||
lndk.conf | |||
lndk.conf* |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What do we need this for? Wouldn't *.conf
be more helpful?
@@ -204,6 +208,9 @@ impl LndNode { | |||
"--bitcoind.rpchost={:?}", | |||
bitcoind_connect_params.rpc_socket | |||
), | |||
format!("--protocol.custom-message=513"), | |||
format!("--protocol.custom-nodeann=39"), | |||
format!("--protocol.custom-init=39"), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nit: can be " txt ".to_owned()
when we hard set values.
Note to self that we should add some leniency to codecov, sometimes coverage is going to go down and that's ok. |
This PR: