I started a new project in VS 2013 and TFS 2013. After doing a little coding I ran some tests and created test cases in the Test Manager. The tests pass and the Test result files show the impact XML files attached. However, all the subsequent builds show no Tests Impacted. After checking the build logs I see that the Test Impact entry has a Match pattern that ends in:
"\bin***.dll", but the application is a windows form app.
Is there something I have missed in setting up the project that would cause this?
This is the output log section:
...
Run VS Test Runner00:00:00
There were no matches for the search pattern ...\bin\**\*test*.dll
There were no matches for the search pattern ...\bin\**\*test*.appx
Run optional script after Test Runner00:00:00
Inputs
EnvironmentVariables:
Enabled: True
Arguments:
FilePath:
Outputs
Result: 0
Get Impacted Tests00:00:00
There were no matches for the search pattern ...\bin\**\*.dll
A baseline build could not be located. Test impact analysis will not be
performed for this build.
Publish Symbols
...
I found the issue. For the Test Impact Analysis the build must have a drop location: The "copy output to the server" option does not count as a "drop location"!
Related
I have a Java based test suite running Bazel 4.2.2, and my goal is to collect code coverage regardless of test flakiness. I tried to add these options:
bazel coverage ... --runs_per_test=3 --cache_test_results=no ...
but it looks like if 1/3 of those fail, then the test is failed and coverage data is not collected for failing tests.
Does Bazel have any flags to take the first passing result, and retry only on failures?
The full command I've tried is
bazel coverage --jobs=6 --runs_per_test=3 --cache_test_results=no --combined_report=lcov --coverage_report_generator="#bazel_tools//tools/test/CoverageOutputGenerator/java/com/google/devtools/coverageoutputgenerator:Main" -- //$TARGET/... 2>&1
Thanks!
Answer to my question (can't accept it yet): there's an option in the documentation I found
https://docs.bazel.build/versions/0.25.0/command-line-reference.html
--flaky_test_attempts=<a positive integer, the string "default", or test_regex#attempts. This flag may be passed more than once> multiple uses are accumulated
Each test will be retried up to the specified number of times in case of any test failure. Tests that required more than one attempt to pass would be marked as 'FLAKY' in the test summary. If this option is set, it should specify an int N or the string 'default'. If it's an int, then all tests will be run up to N times. If it is not specified or its value is ' default', then only a single test attempt will be made for regular tests and three for tests marked explicitly as flaky by their rule (flaky=1 attribute).
Another option is using the flaky attribute on your test rules for the problematic tests. That will run them up to 3 times even with normal bazel test, without needing any flags.
I want to query all gtest cases by bazel,
parameter "--gtest_filter" only can be used with "bazel test " cmd
and I am try to use "bazel query bazel query //xxx:all", but it will show the test list which defined in BUILD file , I want to get the cases list from xxx.cc files.
This is not a job that bazel query can do. Query operates on the graph structure of targets. A fundamental design decision of Bazel is that this graph can be computed by looking only at BUILD files and the .bzl files they depend on. In particular, parsing source files is not allowed.
(The argument to --test_filter is simply passed through the test runner; Bazel does not know what it represents.)
If you use CLion with the Bazel plugin you get the following view for googletest tests:
This works even with Catch2 (but for Catch2 the view is not so nice). I guess that's some IDE magic here - nevertheless, it gives you what you want. I assume you can also come up with some type of Bazel Aspect that produces this information for you.
I tested this also with Lavender (with minor modifications) and Visual Studio which gives me in the test overview also a list of all test:
I am executing robot test results using timestampoutput command to store results , whenever i execute this it will create me a log & report results ending with timestamp . But my problem is how to get the test report/log in jenkins post results which are generated in that timestamp.Please let me know if this is the right approach or any alternate solution is there. Any guidance is appreciated. Thanks
pybot --outputdir var/test-results/%date:~-4,4%%date:~-10,2%%date:~-7,2% --timestampoutputs
Output: var\test-results\20170601\output-20170601-155017.xml
Log: var\test-results\20170601\log-20170601-155017.html
Report: var\test-results\20170601\report-20170601-155017.html
The date formatting and Jenkins Robot Framework Publish results plugin are two approaches that conflict each other. The publish result plugin copies the contents of the output folder to a new folder that is in line with the build number. This ensures uniqueness and using the Jenkins UI all the information about when a build was initiated is found, it should not need a folder name based on a date.
I was wondering if any of you guys had any experience generating code coverage reports in TFS Build Server 2010 while running NUnit tests.
I know it can be easily done with the packaged alternative (MSTest + enabling coverage on the testrunconfig file), but things are a little more involved when using NUnit. I've found some info here and there pointing to NCover, but it seems outdated. I wonder if there are other alternatives and whether someone has actually implemented this or not.
Here's more info about our environment/needs:
- TFS Build Server 2010
- Tests are in plain class libraries (not Test libraries - i.e., no testrunconfig files associated), and are implemented in NUnit. We have no MSTests.
- We are interested in running coverage reports as part of each build and if possible setting coverage threshold requirements for pass/fail criteria.
We 've done it with NUnit-NCover and are pretty happy with our results. NUnit execution is followed by NUnitTfs execution in order to get our testing results published in the Build Log. Then NCover kicks in, generating our code coverage results.
One major thing that poses as a disadvantage is fact that setting up the arguments for properly invoking NCover wasn't trivial. But since I installed it, I never had to maintain it.
Two things could pose as disadvantages:
NUnitTfs doesn't work well with NCover (at least I couldn't find a way to execute both in the same step, so (since NCover invokes NUnit) I have to run Unit tests twice: (1) to get the test results and (2) to get coverage results over NCover. Naturally, that makes my builds last longer.
Setting up the arguments for properly invoking NCover wasn't trivial. But since I installed it, I never had to maintain it .
In any case, the resulting reporting (especially the Trend aspect) is very useful in monitoring how our code evolves within time. Especially if you 're working on a Platform (as opposed to short-timed Projects), Trend reports are of great value.
EDIT
I 'll try to present in a quick & dirty manner how I 've implemented this, I hope it can be useful. We currently have NCover 3.4.12 on our build server.
Our simple naming convention regarding our NUnit assemblies is that if we have a production assembly "123.dll", then another assembly named "123_nunit.dll" exists that implements its tests. So, each build has several *_nunit.dll assemblies that are of interest.
The part in the build process template under "If not disable tests" is the one that has been reworked in order to achieve our goals, in particular the section that was named "Run MSTest for Test Assemblies". The whole implementation is here, after some cleanups to make the flow easier to be understood (pic was too large to be directly inserted here).
At first, some additional Arguments are implemented in the Build Process Template & are then available to be set in each build definition:
We then form the NUnit args in "Formulate nunitCommandLine":
String.Format("{0} /xml={1}\\{2}.xml", nunitDLL, TestResultsDirectory, Path.GetFileNameWithoutExtension(nunitDLL))
This is then used in the "Invoke NUnit"
In case this succeeds & we have set coverage for this build we move to "Generate NCover NCCOV" (the coverage file for this particular assembly). For this we invoke NCover.Console.exe with the following as Args:
String.Format("""{0}"" ""{1}"" //w ""{2}"" //x ""{3}\{4}"" //literal //ias {5} //onlywithsource //p ""{6}""",
NUnitPath,
Path.GetFileName(nunitDLL),
Path.GetDirectoryName(nunitDLL),
Path.GetDirectoryName(Path.GetDirectoryName(nunitDLL)),
Path.GetFileName(nunitDLL).Replace("_nunit.dll", ".nccov"),
Path.GetFileNameWithoutExtension(nunitDLL).Replace("_nunit", ""),
BuildDetail.BuildNumber)
All these run in the foreach loop "For all nunit dlls". When we exit the loop, we enter "Final NCover Activities" & at first the part "Merge NCCovs", where NCover.Console.exe is executed again - this time with different args:
String.Format("""{0}\*.nccov"" //s ""{0}\{1}.nccov"" //at ""{2}\{3}\{3}.trend"" //p {1} ",
Path.GetDirectoryName(Path.GetDirectoryName(testAssemblies(0))),
BuildDetail.BuildNumber,
NCoverDropLocation,
BuildDetail.BuildDefinition.TeamProject
)
When this has run, we have reached the point where all NCCOV files of this build are merged into one NCCOV-file named after the build + the Trend file (that monitors the build throughout its life) has been updated with the elements of this current build.
We now have to only generate the final HTML report, this is done in "Generate final NCover rep" where we invoke NCover.reporting with the following args:
String.Format(" ""{0}\{1}.nccov"" //or FullCoverageReport //op ""{2}\{1}_NCoverReport.html"" //p ""{1}"" //at ""{3}\{4}\{4}_{5}.trend"" ",
Path.GetDirectoryName(Path.GetDirectoryName(testAssemblies(0))),
BuildDetail.BuildNumber,
PathForNCoverResults,
NCoverDropLocation,
BuildDetail.BuildDefinition.TeamProject,
BuildType
)
In Jenkins there is a possibility to create free project which can contain a script execution. The build fails (becomes red) when the return level of the script is not 0.
Is there a possibility to make it "yellow"?
(Yellow usually indicates successful build with failed tests)
The system runs on Linux.
Give the Log Parser Plugin a try. That should do the trick for you.
One slightly hacky way do do it, is to alter the job to publish test results and supply fake results.
I've got a job that is publishing the test results from a file called "results.xml". The last step in my build script checks the return value of the build, copies eihter "results-good.xml" or "results-unstable.xml" to "results.xml" and then returns a zero.
Thus if the script fails on one of the early steps, the build is red. But if the build succeeds its green or yellow based on the return code it would have retunred without this hack.