Search Results

Search found 6281 results on 252 pages for 'automated tests'.

Page 63/252 | < Previous Page | 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70  | Next Page >

  • Catch test case order [on hold]

    - by DeadMG
    Can I guarantee the order of execution with multiple TEST_CASEs with Catch? I am testing some code using LLVM, and they have some despicable global state that I need to explicitly initialize. Right now I have one test case that's like this: TEST_CASE("", "") { // Initialize really shitty LLVM global variables. llvm::InitializeAllTargets(); llvm::InitializeAllTargetMCs(); llvm::InitializeAllAsmPrinters(); llvm::InitializeNativeTarget(); llvm::InitializeAllAsmParsers(); // Some per-test setup I can make into its own function CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Interpret(...)); CHECK_THROWS(Compile(...)); CHECK_THROWS(Compile(...)); } What I want is to refactor it into three TEST_CASE, one for tests that should pass compilation, one for tests that should fail, and -one for tests that should pass interpretation (and in the future, further such divisions, perhaps). But I can't simply move the test contents into another TEST_CASE because if that TEST_CASE is called before the one that sets up the inconvenient globals, then they won't be initialized and the testing will spuriously fail.

    Read the article

  • Guidance: A Branching strategy for Scrum Teams

    - by Martin Hinshelwood
    Having a good branching strategy will save your bacon, or at least your code. Be careful when deviating from your branching strategy because if you do, you may be worse off than when you started! This is one possible branching strategy for Scrum teams and I will not be going in depth with Scrum but you can find out more about Scrum by reading the Scrum Guide and you can even assess your Scrum knowledge by having a go at the Scrum Open Assessment. You can also read SSW’s Rules to Better Scrum using TFS which have been developed during our own Scrum implementations. Acknowledgements Bill Heys – Bill offered some good feedback on this post and helped soften the language. Note: Bill is a VS ALM Ranger and co-wrote the Branching Guidance for TFS 2010 Willy-Peter Schaub – Willy-Peter is an ex Visual Studio ALM MVP turned blue badge and has been involved in most of the guidance including the Branching Guidance for TFS 2010 Chris Birmele – Chris wrote some of the early TFS Branching and Merging Guidance. Dr Paul Neumeyer, Ph.D Parallel Processes, ScrumMaster and SSW Solution Architect – Paul wanted to have feature branches coming from the release branch as well. We agreed that this is really a spin-off that needs own project, backlog, budget and Team. Scenario: A product is developed RTM 1.0 is released and gets great sales.  Extra features are demanded but the new version will have double to price to pay to recover costs, work is approved by the guys with budget and a few sprints later RTM 2.0 is released.  Sales a very low due to the pricing strategy. There are lots of clients on RTM 1.0 calling out for patches. As I keep getting Reverse Integration and Forward Integration mixed up and Bill keeps slapping my wrists I thought I should have a reminder: You still seemed to use reverse and/or forward integration in the wrong context. I would recommend reviewing your document at the end to ensure that it agrees with the common understanding of these terms merge (forward integration) from parent to child (same direction as the branch), and merge  (reverse integration) from child to parent (the reverse direction of the branch). - one of my many slaps on the wrist from Bill Heys.   As I mentioned previously we are using a single feature branching strategy in our current project. The single biggest mistake developers make is developing against the “Main” or “Trunk” line. This ultimately leads to messy code as things are added and never finished. Your only alternative is to NEVER check in unless your code is 100%, but this does not work in practice, even with a single developer. Your ADD will kick in and your half-finished code will be finished enough to pass the build and the tests. You do use builds don’t you? Sadly, this is a very common scenario and I have had people argue that branching merely adds complexity. Then again I have seen the other side of the universe ... branching  structures from he... We should somehow convince everyone that there is a happy between no-branching and too-much-branching. - Willy-Peter Schaub, VS ALM Ranger, Microsoft   A key benefit of branching for development is to isolate changes from the stable Main branch. Branching adds sanity more than it adds complexity. We do try to stress in our guidance that it is important to justify a branch, by doing a cost benefit analysis. The primary cost is the effort to do merges and resolve conflicts. A key benefit is that you have a stable code base in Main and accept changes into Main only after they pass quality gates, etc. - Bill Heys, VS ALM Ranger & TFS Branching Lead, Microsoft The second biggest mistake developers make is branching anything other than the WHOLE “Main” line. If you branch parts of your code and not others it gets out of sync and can make integration a nightmare. You should have your Source, Assets, Build scripts deployment scripts and dependencies inside the “Main” folder and branch the whole thing. Some departments within MSFT even go as far as to add the environments used to develop the product in there as well; although I would not recommend that unless you have a massive SQL cluster to house your source code. We tried the “add environment” back in South-Africa and while it was “phenomenal”, especially when having to switch between environments, the disk storage and processing requirements killed us. We opted for virtualization to skin this cat of keeping a ready-to-go environment handy. - Willy-Peter Schaub, VS ALM Ranger, Microsoft   I think people often think that you should have separate branches for separate environments (e.g. Dev, Test, Integration Test, QA, etc.). I prefer to think of deploying to environments (such as from Main to QA) rather than branching for QA). - Bill Heys, VS ALM Ranger & TFS Branching Lead, Microsoft   You can read about SSW’s Rules to better Source Control for some additional information on what Source Control to use and how to use it. There are also a number of branching Anti-Patterns that should be avoided at all costs: You know you are on the wrong track if you experience one or more of the following symptoms in your development environment: Merge Paranoia—avoiding merging at all cost, usually because of a fear of the consequences. Merge Mania—spending too much time merging software assets instead of developing them. Big Bang Merge—deferring branch merging to the end of the development effort and attempting to merge all branches simultaneously. Never-Ending Merge—continuous merging activity because there is always more to merge. Wrong-Way Merge—merging a software asset version with an earlier version. Branch Mania—creating many branches for no apparent reason. Cascading Branches—branching but never merging back to the main line. Mysterious Branches—branching for no apparent reason. Temporary Branches—branching for changing reasons, so the branch becomes a permanent temporary workspace. Volatile Branches—branching with unstable software assets shared by other branches or merged into another branch. Note   Branches are volatile most of the time while they exist as independent branches. That is the point of having them. The difference is that you should not share or merge branches while they are in an unstable state. Development Freeze—stopping all development activities while branching, merging, and building new base lines. Berlin Wall—using branches to divide the development team members, instead of dividing the work they are performing. -Branching and Merging Primer by Chris Birmele - Developer Tools Technical Specialist at Microsoft Pty Ltd in Australia   In fact, this can result in a merge exercise no-one wants to be involved in, merging hundreds of thousands of change sets and trying to get a consolidated build. Again, we need to find a happy medium. - Willy-Peter Schaub on Merge Paranoia Merge conflicts are generally the result of making changes to the same file in both the target and source branch. If you create merge conflicts, you will eventually need to resolve them. Often the resolution is manual. Merging more frequently allows you to resolve these conflicts close to when they happen, making the resolution clearer. Waiting weeks or months to resolve them, the Big Bang approach, means you are more likely to resolve conflicts incorrectly. - Bill Heys, VS ALM Ranger & TFS Branching Lead, Microsoft   Figure: Main line, this is where your stable code lives and where any build has known entities, always passes and has a happy test that passes as well? Many development projects consist of, a single “Main” line of source and artifacts. This is good; at least there is source control . There are however a couple of issues that need to be considered. What happens if: you and your team are working on a new set of features and the customer wants a change to his current version? you are working on two features and the customer decides to abandon one of them? you have two teams working on different feature sets and their changes start interfering with each other? I just use labels instead of branches? That's a lot of “what if’s”, but there is a simple way of preventing this. Branching… In TFS, labels are not immutable. This does not mean they are not useful. But labels do not provide a very good development isolation mechanism. Branching allows separate code sets to evolve separately (e.g. Current with hotfixes, and vNext with new development). I don’t see how labels work here. - Bill Heys, VS ALM Ranger & TFS Branching Lead, Microsoft   Figure: Creating a single feature branch means you can isolate the development work on that branch.   Its standard practice for large projects with lots of developers to use Feature branching and you can check the Branching Guidance for the latest recommendations from the Visual Studio ALM Rangers for other methods. In the diagram above you can see my recommendation for branching when using Scrum development with TFS 2010. It consists of a single Sprint branch to contain all the changes for the current sprint. The main branch has the permissions changes so contributors to the project can only Branch and Merge with “Main”. This will prevent accidental check-ins or checkouts of the “Main” line that would contaminate the code. The developers continue to develop on sprint one until the completion of the sprint. Note: In the real world, starting a new Greenfield project, this process starts at Sprint 2 as at the start of Sprint 1 you would have artifacts in version control and no need for isolation.   Figure: Once the sprint is complete the Sprint 1 code can then be merged back into the Main line. There are always good practices to follow, and one is to always do a Forward Integration from Main into Sprint 1 before you do a Reverse Integration from Sprint 1 back into Main. In this case it may seem superfluous, but this builds good muscle memory into your developer’s work ethic and means that no bad habits are learned that would interfere with additional Scrum Teams being added to the Product. The process of completing your sprint development: The Team completes their work according to their definition of done. Merge from “Main” into “Sprint1” (Forward Integration) Stabilize your code with any changes coming from other Scrum Teams working on the same product. If you have one Scrum Team this should be quick, but there may have been bug fixes in the Release branches. (we will talk about release branches later) Merge from “Sprint1” into “Main” to commit your changes. (Reverse Integration) Check-in Delete the Sprint1 branch Note: The Sprint 1 branch is no longer required as its useful life has been concluded. Check-in Done But you are not yet done with the Sprint. The goal in Scrum is to have a “potentially shippable product” at the end of every Sprint, and we do not have that yet, we only have finished code.   Figure: With Sprint 1 merged you can create a Release branch and run your final packaging and testing In 99% of all projects I have been involved in or watched, a “shippable product” only happens towards the end of the overall lifecycle, especially when sprints are short. The in-between releases are great demonstration releases, but not shippable. Perhaps it comes from my 80’s brain washing that we only ship when we reach the agreed quality and business feature bar. - Willy-Peter Schaub, VS ALM Ranger, Microsoft Although you should have been testing and packaging your code all the way through your Sprint 1 development, preferably using an automated process, you still need to test and package with stable unchanging code. This is where you do what at SSW we call a “Test Please”. This is first an internal test of the product to make sure it meets the needs of the customer and you generally use a resource external to your Team. Then a “Test Please” is conducted with the Product Owner to make sure he is happy with the output. You can read about how to conduct a Test Please on our Rules to Successful Projects: Do you conduct an internal "test please" prior to releasing a version to a client?   Figure: If you find a deviation from the expected result you fix it on the Release branch. If during your final testing or your “Test Please” you find there are issues or bugs then you should fix them on the release branch. If you can’t fix them within the time box of your Sprint, then you will need to create a Bug and put it onto the backlog for prioritization by the Product owner. Make sure you leave plenty of time between your merge from the development branch to find and fix any problems that are uncovered. This process is commonly called Stabilization and should always be conducted once you have completed all of your User Stories and integrated all of your branches. Even once you have stabilized and released, you should not delete the release branch as you would with the Sprint branch. It has a usefulness for servicing that may extend well beyond the limited life you expect of it. Note: Don't get forced by the business into adding features into a Release branch instead that indicates the unspoken requirement is that they are asking for a product spin-off. In this case you can create a new Team Project and branch from the required Release branch to create a new Main branch for that product. And you create a whole new backlog to work from.   Figure: When the Team decides it is happy with the product you can create a RTM branch. Once you have fixed all the bugs you can, and added any you can’t to the Product Backlog, and you Team is happy with the result you can create a Release. This would consist of doing the final Build and Packaging it up ready for your Sprint Review meeting. You would then create a read-only branch that represents the code you “shipped”. This is really an Audit trail branch that is optional, but is good practice. You could use a Label, but Labels are not Auditable and if a dispute was raised by the customer you can produce a verifiable version of the source code for an independent party to check. Rare I know, but you do not want to be at the wrong end of a legal battle. Like the Release branch the RTM branch should never be deleted, or only deleted according to your companies legal policy, which in the UK is usually 7 years.   Figure: If you have made any changes in the Release you will need to merge back up to Main in order to finalise the changes. Nothing is really ever done until it is in Main. The same rules apply when merging any fixes in the Release branch back into Main and you should do a reverse merge before a forward merge, again for the muscle memory more than necessity at this stage. Your Sprint is now nearly complete, and you can have a Sprint Review meeting knowing that you have made every effort and taken every precaution to protect your customer’s investment. Note: In order to really achieve protection for both you and your client you would add Automated Builds, Automated Tests, Automated Acceptance tests, Acceptance test tracking, Unit Tests, Load tests, Web test and all the other good engineering practices that help produce reliable software.     Figure: After the Sprint Planning meeting the process begins again. Where the Sprint Review and Retrospective meetings mark the end of the Sprint, the Sprint Planning meeting marks the beginning. After you have completed your Sprint Planning and you know what you are trying to achieve in Sprint 2 you can create your new Branch to develop in. How do we handle a bug(s) in production that can’t wait? Although in Scrum the only work done should be on the backlog there should be a little buffer added to the Sprint Planning for contingencies. One of these contingencies is a bug in the current release that can’t wait for the Sprint to finish. But how do you handle that? Willy-Peter Schaub asked an excellent question on the release activities: In reality Sprint 2 starts when sprint 1 ends + weekend. Should we not cater for a possible parallelism between Sprint 2 and the release activities of sprint 1? It would introduce FI’s from main to sprint 2, I guess. Your “Figure: Merging print 2 back into Main.” covers, what I tend to believe to be reality in most cases. - Willy-Peter Schaub, VS ALM Ranger, Microsoft I agree, and if you have a single Scrum team then your resources are limited. The Scrum Team is responsible for packaging and release, so at least one run at stabilization, package and release should be included in the Sprint time box. If more are needed on the current production release during the Sprint 2 time box then resource needs to be pulled from Sprint 2. The Product Owner and the Team have four choices (in order of disruption/cost): Backlog: Add the bug to the backlog and fix it in the next Sprint Buffer Time: Use any buffer time included in the current Sprint to fix the bug quickly Make time: Remove a Story from the current Sprint that is of equal value to the time lost fixing the bug(s) and releasing. Note: The Team must agree that it can still meet the Sprint Goal. Cancel Sprint: Cancel the sprint and concentrate all resource on fixing the bug(s) Note: This can be a very costly if the current sprint has already had a lot of work completed as it will be lost. The choice will depend on the complexity and severity of the bug(s) and both the Product Owner and the Team need to agree. In this case we will go with option #2 or #3 as they are uncomplicated but severe bugs. Figure: Real world issue where a bug needs fixed in the current release. If the bug(s) is urgent enough then then your only option is to fix it in place. You can edit the release branch to find and fix the bug, hopefully creating a test so it can’t happen again. Follow the prior process and conduct an internal and customer “Test Please” before releasing. You can read about how to conduct a Test Please on our Rules to Successful Projects: Do you conduct an internal "test please" prior to releasing a version to a client?   Figure: After you have fixed the bug you need to ship again. You then need to again create an RTM branch to hold the version of the code you released in escrow.   Figure: Main is now out of sync with your Release. We now need to get these new changes back up into the Main branch. Do a reverse and then forward merge again to get the new code into Main. But what about the branch, are developers not working on Sprint 2? Does Sprint 2 now have changes that are not in Main and Main now have changes that are not in Sprint 2? Well, yes… and this is part of the hit you take doing branching. But would this scenario even have been possible without branching?   Figure: Getting the changes in Main into Sprint 2 is very important. The Team now needs to do a Forward Integration merge into their Sprint and resolve any conflicts that occur. Maybe the bug has already been fixed in Sprint 2, maybe the bug no longer exists! This needs to be identified and resolved by the developers before they continue to get further out of Sync with Main. Note: Avoid the “Big bang merge” at all costs.   Figure: Merging Sprint 2 back into Main, the Forward Integration, and R0 terminates. Sprint 2 now merges (Reverse Integration) back into Main following the procedures we have already established.   Figure: The logical conclusion. This then allows the creation of the next release. By now you should be getting the big picture and hopefully you learned something useful from this post. I know I have enjoyed writing it as I find these exploratory posts coupled with real world experience really help harden my understanding.  Branching is a tool; it is not a silver bullet. Don’t over use it, and avoid “Anti-Patterns” where possible. Although the diagram above looks complicated I hope showing you how it is formed simplifies it as much as possible.   Technorati Tags: Branching,Scrum,VS ALM,TFS 2010,VS2010

    Read the article

  • How Expedia Made My New Bride Cry

    - by Lance Robinson
    Tweet this? Email Expedia and ask them to give me and my new wife our honeymoon? When Expedia followed up their failure with our honeymoon trip with a complete and total lack of acknowledgement of any responsibility for the problem and endless loops of explaining the issue over and over again - I swore that they would make it right. When they brought my new bride to tears, I got an immediate and endless supply of motivation. I hope you will help me make them make it right by posting our story on Twitter, Facebook, your blog, on Expedia itself, and when talking to your friends in person about their own travel plans.   If you are considering using them now for an important trip - reconsider. Short summary: We arrived early for a flight - but Expedia had made a mistake with the data they supplied to JetBlue and Emirates, which resulted in us not being able to check in (one leg of our trip was missing)!  At the time of this post, three people (myself, my wife, and an exceptionally patient JetBlue employee named Mary) each spent hours on the phone with Expedia.  I myself spent right at 3 hours (according to iPhone records), Lauren spent an hour and a half or so, and poor Mary was probably on the phone for a good 3.5 hours.  This is after 5 hours total at the airport.  If you add up our phone time, that is nearly 8 hours of phone time over a 5 hour period with little or no help, stall tactics (?), run-around, denial, shifting of blame, and holding. Details below (times are approximate): First, my wife and I were married yesterday - June 18th, the 3 year anniversary of our first date. She is awesome. She is the nicest person I have ever known, a ton of fun, absolutely beautiful in every way. Ok enough mushy - here are the dirty details. 2:30 AM - Early Check-in Attempt - we attempted to check-in for our flight online. Some sort of technology error on website, instructed to checkin at desk. 4:30 AM - Arrive at airport. Try to check-in at kiosk, get the same error. We got to the JetBlue desk at RDU International Airport, where Mary helped us. Mary discovered that the Expedia provided itinerary does not match the Expedia provided tickets. We are informed that when that happens American, JetBlue, and others that use the same software cannot check you in for the flight because. Why? Because the itinerary was missing a leg of our flight! Basically we were not shown in the system as definitely being able to make it home. Mary called Expedia and was put on hold by their automated system. 4:55 AM - Mary, myself, and my brand new bride all waited for about 25 minutes when finally I decided I would make a call myself on my iPhone while Mary was on the airport phone. In their automated system, I chose "make a new reservation", thinking they might answer a little more quickly than "customer service". Not surprisingly I was connected to an Expedia person within 1 minute. They informed me that they would have to forward me to a customer service specialist. I explained to them that we were already on hold for that and had been for nearly half an hour, that we were going on our honeymoon and that our flight would be leaving soon - could they please help us. "Yes, I will help you". I hand the phone to JetBlue Mary who explains the situation 3 or 4 times. Obviously I couldn't hear both ends of the conversation at this point, but the Expedia person explained what the problem was by stating exactly what Mary had just spent 15 minutes explaining. Mary calmly confirms that this is the problem, and asks Expedia to re-issue the itinerary. Expedia tells Mary that they'll have to transfer her to customer service. Mary asks for someone specific so that we get an answer this time, and goes on hold. Mary get's connected, explains the situation, and then Mary's connection gets terminated. 5:10 AM - Mary calls back to the Expedia automated system again, and we wait for about 5 minutes on hold this time before I pick up my iPhone and call Expedia again myself. Again I go to sales, a person picks up the phone in less than a minute. I explain the situation and let them know that we are now very close to missing our flight for our honeymoon, could they please help us. "Yes, I will help you". Again I give the phone to Mary who provides them with a call back number in case we get disconnected again and explains the situation again. More back and forth with Expedia doing nothing but repeating the same questions, Mary answering the questions with the same information she provided in the original explanation, and Expedia simply restating the problem. Mary again asks them to re-issue the itinerary, and explains that doing so will fix the problem. Expedia again repeats the problem instead of fixing it, and Mary's connection gets terminated. 5:20 AM - Mary again calls back to Expedia. My beautiful bride also calls on her own phone. At this point she is struggling to hold back her tears, stumbling through an explanation of all that has happened and that we are about to miss our flight. Please help us. "Yes, I will help". My beautiful bride's connection gets terminated. Ok, maybe this disconnection isn't an accident. We've now been disconnected 3 times on two different phones. 5:45 AM - I walk away and pleadingly beg a person to help me. They "escalate" the issue to "Rosy" (sp?) at Expedia. I go through the whole song and dance again with Rosy, who gives me the same treatment Mary was given. Rosy blames JetBlue for now having the correct data. Meanwhile Mary is on the phone with Emirates Air (the airline for the second leg of our trip), who agrees with JetBlue that Expedia's data isn't up to date. We are informed by two airport employees that issues like this with Expedia are not uncommon, and that the fix is simple. On the phone iwth Rosy, I ask her to re-issue the itinerary because we are about to miss our flight. She again explains the problem to me. At this point, I am standing at the window, pleading with Rosy to help us get to our honeymoon, watching our airplane. Then our airplane leaves without us. 6:03 AM - At this point we have missed our flight. Re-issuing the itinerary is no longer a solution. I ask Rosy to start from the beginning and work us up a new trip. She says that she cannot do that. She says that she needs to talk to JetBlue and Emirates and find out why we cannot check-in for our flight. I remind Rosy that our flight has already left - I just watched it taxi away - it no longer matters why (not to mention the fact that we already knew why, and have known why since 4:30 AM), and have known the solution since 4:30 AM. Rosy, can you please book a new trip? Yes, but it will cost $400. Excuse me? Now you can, but it will cost ME to fix your mistake? Rosy says that she can escalate the situation to her supervisor but that will take 1.5 hours. 6:15 AM - I told Rosy that if they had re-issued the itinerary as JetBlue asked (at 4:30 AM), my new wife and I might be on the airplane now instead of dealing with this on the phone and missing the beginning (and how much more?) of our honeymoon. Rosy said that it was not necessary to re-issue the itinerary. Out of curiosity, i asked Rosy if there was some financial burden on them to re-issue the itinerary. "No", said Rosy. I asked her if it was a large time burden on Expedia to re-issue the itinerary. "No", said Rosy. I directly asked Rosy: Why wouldn't Expedia have re-issued the itinerary when JetBlue asked? No answer. I asked Rosy: If you had re-issued the itinerary at 4:30, isn't it possible that I would be on that flight right now? She actually surprised me by answering "Yes" to that question. So I pointed out that it followed that Expedia was responsible for the fact that we missed out flight, and she immediately went into more about how the problem was with JetBlue - but now it was ALSO an Emirates Air problem as well. I tell Rosy to go ahead and escalate the issue again, and please call me back in that 1.5 hours (which how is about 1 hour and 10 minutes away). 6:30 AM - I start tweeting my frustration with iPhone. It's now pretty much impossible for us to make it to The Maldives by 3pm, which is the time at which we would need to arrive in order to be allowed service to the actual island where we are staying. Expedia has now given me the run-around for 2 hours, caused me to miss my flight, and worst of all caused my amazing new wife Lauren to miss our honeymoon. You think I was mad? No. Furious. Its ok to make mistakes - but to refuse to fix them and to ruin our honeymoon? No, not ok, Expedia. I swore right then that Expedia would make this right. 7:45 AM - JetBlue mary is still talking her tail off to other people in JetBlue and Emirates Air. Mary works it out so that if Expedia simply books a new trip, JetBlue and Emirates will both waive all the fees. Now we just have to convince Expedia to fix their mistake and get us on our way! Around this time Expedia Rosy calls me back! I inform her of the excellent work of JetBlue Mary - that JetBlue and Emirates both will waive the fees so Expedia can fix their mistake and get us going on our way. She says that she sees documentation of this in her system and that she needs to put me on hold "for 1 to 10 minutes" to talk to Emirates Air (why I'm not exactly sure). I say ok. 8:45 AM - After an hour on hold, Rosy comes on the line and asks me to hold more. I ask her to call me back. 9:35 AM - I put down the iPhone Twitter app and picks up the laptop. You think I made some noise with my iPhone? Heh 11:25 AM - Expedia follows me and sends a canned "We're sorry, DM us the details".  If you look at their Twitter feed, 16 out of the most recent 20 tweets are exactly the same canned response.  The other 4?  Ads.  Um - #MultiFAIL? To Expedia:  You now have had (as explained above) 8 hours of 3 different people explaining our situation, you know the email address of our Expedia account, you know my web blog, you know my Twitter address, you know my phone number.  You also know how upset you have made both me and my new bride by treating us with such a ... non caring, scripted, uncooperative, argumentative, and possibly even deceitful manner.  In the wise words of the great Kenan Thompson of SNL: "FIX IT!".  And no, I'm NOT going away until you make this right. Period. 11:45 AM - Expedia corporate office called.  The woman I spoke to was very nice and apologetic.  She listened to me tell the story again, she says she understands the problem and she is going to work to resolve it.  I don't have any details on what exactly that resolution might me, she said she will call me back in 20 minutes.  She found out about the problem via Twitter.  Thank you Twitter, and all of you who helped.  Hopefully social media will win my wife and I our honeymoon, and hopefully Expedia will encourage their customer service teams treat their customers properly. 12:22 PM - Spoke to Fran again from Expedia corporate office.  She has a flight for us tonight.  She is booking it now.  We will arrive at our honeymoon destination of beautiful Veligandu Island Resort only 1 day late.  She cannot confirm today, but she expects that Expedia will pay for the lost honeymoon night.  Thank you everyone for your help.  I will reflect more on this whole situation and confirm its resolution after our flight is 100% confirmed.  For now, I'm going to take a breather and go kiss my wonderful wife! 1:50 PM - Have not yet received the promised phone call.  We did receive an email with a new itinerary for a flight but the booking is not for specific seats, so there is no guarantee that my wife and I will be able to sit together.  With the original booking I carefully selected our seats for every segment of our trip.  I decided to call into the phone number that Fran from the Expedia corporate office gave me.  Its automated voice system identified itself as "Tier 3 Support".  I am currently still on hold with them, I have not gotten through to a human yet. 1:55 PM - Fran from Expedia called me back.  She confirmed us as booked.  She called the airlines to confirm.  Unfortunately, Expedia was unwilling or unable to allow us any type of seat selection.  It is possible that i won't get to sit next to the woman I married less than a day ago on our 40 total hours of flight time (there and back).  In addition, our seats could be the worst seats on the planes, with no reclining seat back or right next to the restroom.  Despite this fact (which in my opinion is huge), the horrible inconvenience, the hours at the airport, and the negative Internet publicity that Expedia is receiving, Expedia declined to offer us any kind of upgrade or to mark us as SFU (suitable for upgrade).  Since they didn't offer - I asked, and was rejected.  I am grateful to finally be heading in the right direction, but not only did Expedia horribly botch this job from the very beginning, they followed that botch job with near zero customer service, followed by a verbally apologetic but otherwise half-hearted resolution.  If this works out favorably for us, great.  If not - I'm not done making noise, Expedia.  You owe us, and I expect you to make it right.  You haven't quite done that yet. Thanks - Thank you to Twitter.  Thanks to all those who sympathize with us and helped us get the attention of Expedia, since three people (one of them an airline employee) using Expedia's normal channels of communication for many hours didn't help.  Thanks especially to my PowerShell and Sharepoint friends, my local friends, and those connectors who encouraged me and spread my story. 5:15 PM - Love Wins - After all this, Lauren and I are exhausted.  We both took a short nap, and when we woke up we talked about the last 24 hours.  It was a big, amazing, story-filled 24 hours.  I said that Expedia won, but Lauren said no.  She pointed out how lucky we are.  We are in love and married.  We have wonderful family and friends.  We are both hard-working successful people who love what they do.  We get to go to an amazing exotic destination for our honeymoon like Veligandu in The Maldives...  That's a lot of good.  Expedia didn't win.  This was (is) a big loss for Expedia.  It is a public blemish for all to see.  But Lauren and I did win, big time.  Expedia may not have made things right - but things are right for us.  Post in progress... I will relay any further comments (or lack of) from Expedia soon, as well as an update on confirmation of their repayment of our lost resort room rates.  I'll also post a picture of us on our honeymoon as soon as I can!

    Read the article

  • ETL Tools and Build Tools

    - by Ngu Soon Hui
    I have familiarities with software automated build tools ( such as Automated Build Studio). Now I am looking at ETL tools. The one thing crosses my mind is that, I can do anything I can do in ETL tools by using a software build tool. ETL tools are tailored for data loading and manipulation for which a lot of scripts are needed in order to do the job. Software build tool, on the other hand, is versatile enough to do any jobs, including writing scripts to extract, transform and load any data from any format into any format. Am I right?

    Read the article

  • Why are 32-bit application pools more efficient in IIS? [closed]

    - by mhenry1384
    I've been running load tests with two different ASP.NET web applications in IIS. The tests are run with 5,10,25, and 250 user agents. Tested on a box with 8 GB RAM, Windows 7 Ultimate x64. The same box running both IIS and the load test project. I did many runs, and the data is very consistent. For every load, I see a lower "Avg. Page Time (sec)" and a lower "Avg. Response Time (sec)" if I have "Enable 32-bit Applications" set to True in the Application Pools. The difference gets more pronounced the higher the load. At very high loads, the web applications start to throw errors (503) if the application pools are 64-bit, but they can can keep up if set to 32-bit. Why are 32-bit app pools so much more efficient? Why isn't the default for application pools 32-bit?

    Read the article

  • Automate Google Chrome extension installation

    - by gtaborga
    Hi everyone, I am working on creating a Google Chrome extension. We have it included in an automated build system and since it is constantly being worked on we need a solution to be able to package the extension as a .crx file which according to http://code.google.com/chrome/extensions/packaging.html can easily be scripted. My question is after packaging the extension is there a known method either through the command-line or some other programmatic way, to install the newly packaged extension in an automated manner? If someone knows how or has any reference material that I can be pointed towards I would greatly appreciate any help that is offered. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • MD3200 - 3 to 4x less throughput than MD1220. Am I missing something here?

    - by Igor Polishchuk
    I have two R710 servers with similar configuration. One in my office has MD1220 attached. Another one in the datacenter of my hosting services vendor has MD3200. I'm getting significantly worse throughput from MD3200 at my vendors setup. I'm mostly interested in sequential writes, and I'm getting these results in bonnie++ and dd tests: Seq. writes on MD1220 in my office: 1.1 GB/s - bonnie++, 1.3GB/s - dd Seq. writes on MD3200 at my vendor's: 240MB/s - bonnie++, 310MB/s - dd Unfortunately, I could not test the exactly the same configurations, but the two I have should be comparable. If anything, my good performing environment is cheaper than the bad performing. I expect at least similar throughput from these two setups. My vendor cannot really help me. Hopefully, somebody more familiar with the DAS performance can look at it and tell if I'm missing something here and my expectations are too high. To summarize, the question here is it reasonable to expect about 100MB/s of sequential write throughput per each couple of drives in RAID10 on MD3200? Is there any trick to enable such performance in MD3200 with dual controller as opposed to simple MD1220 with a single H800 adapter? More details about the configurations: A good one in my office: Dell R710 2CPU X5650 @ 2.67GHz 12 cores 96GB DDR3, OS: RHEL 5.5, kernel 2.6.18-194.26.1.el5 x86_64 20x300GB 2.5" SAS 10K in a single RAID10 1MB chunk size on MD1220 + Dell H800 I/O controller with 1GB cache in the host Not so good one at my vendor's: Dell R710 2CPU L5520 @ 2.27GHz 8 cores 144GB DDR3, OS: RHEL 5.5, kernel 2.6.18-194.11.4.el5 x86_64 20x146GB 2.5" SAS 15K in a single RAID10 512KB chunk size, Dell MD3200, 2 I/O controllers in array with 1GB cache each Additional information. I've also ran the same tests on the same vendor's host, but the storage was: two raids of 14x146GB 15K RPM drives RAID 10, striped together on the OS level on MD3000+MD1000. The performance was about 25% worse than on MD3200 despite having more drives. When I ran similar tests on the internal storage of my vendor's host (2x146GB 15K RPM drives RAID1, Perc 6i) I've got about 128MB/s seq. writes. Just two internal drives gave me about a half of 20 drives' throughput on MD3200. The random I/O performance of the MD3200 setup is ok, it gives me at least 1300 IOPS. I'm mostly have problems with sequentioal I/O throughput. Thank you for looking into it. Regards Igor

    Read the article

  • How to simulate a mouse click on a UIWebView in Cocoa for the iPhone?

    - by eagle
    I'm trying to setup automated unit tests for an iPhone application. I'm using a UIWebView and need to simulate clicks on different links. I've tried doing this with JavaScript, but it doesn't produce the same result as when I manually click on the links. The main problem is with links that have their target property set. I believe the only way for this automated unit test to work correctly is to simulate a mouse click at a specific x/y coordinate (i.e. where the link is located). Since the unit testing will only be used internally, private API calls are fine. It seems like this should be possible since the iPhone app isimulate seems to do something similar. Is there any way to do this in the framework?

    Read the article

  • Quickly revert an Oracle Database to a known state

    - by Anthony
    I would like to use Selenium to test a web application but in order to do that successfully the tests must be run against a database at a known state. The recording and running of the Selenium tests is not within the scope of this website so I'm only looking for recommendations on how best to revert the database after each test execution. Some details: current database size is 30GB however only about 4GB needs to be reverted database is Oracle 11g Standard Edition running on Windows Server 2003 the data in 6 different schemas needs to be reverted Ideally the process should be scripted so that it can be re-executed frequently and automatically via a scheduled task.

    Read the article

  • Linking LLVM JIT Code to Static LLVM Libraries?

    - by inflector
    I'm in the process of implementing a cross-platform (Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux) application which will do lots of CPU intensive analysis of financial data. The bulk of the analysis engine will be written in C++ for speed reasons, with a user-accessible scripting engine interfacing with the C++ testing engine. I want to write several scripting front-ends over time to emulate other popular software with existing large user bases. The first front will be a VisualBasic-like scripting language. I'm thinking that LLVM would be perfect for my needs. Performance is very important because of the sheer amount of data; it can take hours or days to run a single run of tests to get an answer. I believe that using LLVM will also allow me to use a single back-end solution while I implement different front-ends for different flavors of the scripting language over time. The testing engine itself will be separated from the interface and testing will even take place in a separate process with progress and results being reported to the testing management interface. Tests will consist of scripting code integrated with the testing engine code. In a previous implementation of a similar commercial testing system I wrote, I built a fast interpreter which easily interfaced with the testing library because it was written in C++ and linked directly to the testing engine library. Callbacks from scripting code to testing library objects involved translating between the formats with significant overhead. I'm imagining that with LLVM, I could implement the callbacks into C++ directly so that I could make the scripting code work almost as if it had been written in C++. Likewise, if all the code was compiled to LLVM byte-code format, it seems like the LLVM optimizers could optimize across the boundaries between the scripting language and the testing engine code that was written in C++. I don't want to have to compile the testing engine every time. Ideally, I'd like to JIT compile only the scripting code. For small tests, I'd skip some optimization passes, while for large tests, I'd perform full optimizations during the link. So is this possible? Can I precompile the testing engine to a .o object file or .a library file and then link in the scripting code using the JIT? Finally, ideally, I'd like to have the scripting code implement specific methods as subclasses for a specific C++ class. So the C++ testing engine would only see C++ objects while the JIT setup code compiled scripting code that implemented some of the methods for the objects. It seems that if I used the right name mangling algorithm it would be relatively easy to set up the LLVM generation for the scripting language to look like a C++ method call which could then be linked into the testing engine. Thus the linking stage would go in two directions, calls from the scripting language into the testing engine objects to retrieve pricing information and test state information and calls from the testing engine of methods of some particular C++ objects where the code was supplied not from C++ but from the scripting language. In summary: 1) Can I link in precompiled (either .bc, .o, or .a) files as part of the JIT compilation, code-generation process? 2) Can I link in code using that the process in 1) above in such a way that I am able to create code that acts as if it was all written in C++?

    Read the article

  • What technical skills needed for algorithmic trading, HFT, etc?

    - by alchemical
    I'm interested in getting into developing trading systems, black box, HFT, etc. My primary experience is with C# and .Net (7 years). I've also done some sockets programming. I have some experience in finance working on analysis applications (2 years). My goal is to move into developing automated trading systems for a hedge fund, bank, etc. Is there any way to learn the skills needed for this without somehow getting the job first? I've looked at the open source tradelink, IB interactive brokerage, etc. I'm playing around with this framework, and may hook it up and do some paper trading. However, I'm not sure if this has much relationship with how a well-funded entity would be conducting a high-level automated trading operation. I.e. would the tools and frameworks they prefer be a totally different skill-set? Also wondering if I need to learn C++ and/or Java for these types of apps.

    Read the article

  • How to prevent recursive windows when connecting to vncserver on localhost

    - by blog.adaptivesoftware.biz
    I have a VNCServer (vino) configured on my Ubuntu 8.10 box. I would like to connect to this server from a vncclient running on this same machine (the reason for doing this strange thing is mentioned below). Understandably, when I connect to a vncserver on the same box, my vncclient shows recursive windows. Is there a way I can connect to the vncserver on the same machine and not have the recursive windows problem? Perhaps if I could start the vncserver on one display and the client on another display then will it work? How can I do something like this? Note - Reason for running vnc client and server on the same machine: When I start our Java Swing unit test suite, a bunch of swing UI's are created and destroyed as the tests run. These windows fly in the foreground making it impossible to work while the test suite is running. I am hoping to start the test suite within a vncclient so that I can continue working while the tests run.

    Read the article

  • Using JUnit with App Engine and Eclipse

    - by Mark M
    I am having trouble setting up JUnit with App Engine in Eclipse. I have JUnit set up correctly, that is, I can run tests that don't involve the datastore or other services. However, when I try to use the datastore in my tests they fail. The code I am trying right now is from the App Engine site (see below): http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/java/tools/localunittesting.html#Running_Tests So far I have added the external JAR (using Eclipse) appengine-testing.jar. But when I run the tests I get the exception below. So, I am clearly not understanding the instructions to enable the services from the web page mentioned above. Can someone clear up the steps needed to make the App Engine services available in Eclipse? java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: com/google/appengine/api/datastore/dev/LocalDatastoreService at com.google.appengine.tools.development.testing.LocalDatastoreServiceTestConfig.tearDown(LocalDatastoreServiceTestConfig.java:138) at com.google.appengine.tools.development.testing.LocalServiceTestHelper.tearDown(LocalServiceTestHelper.java:254) at com.cooperconrad.server.MemberTest.tearDown(MemberTest.java:28) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597) at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:44) at org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:15) at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:41) at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunAfters.evaluate(RunAfters.java:37) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:73) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:46) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:180) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:41) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:173) at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:28) at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunAfters.evaluate(RunAfters.java:31) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:220) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit4.runner.JUnit4TestReference.run(JUnit4TestReference.java:46) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.TestExecution.run(TestExecution.java:38) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:467) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:683) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.run(RemoteTestRunner.java:390) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.main(RemoteTestRunner.java:197) Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: com.google.appengine.api.datastore.dev.LocalDatastoreService at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:202) at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method) at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:190) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:307) at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Launcher.java:301) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:248) ... 25 more Here is the actual code (pretty much copied from the site): package com.example; import static org.junit.Assert.*; import org.junit.After; import org.junit.Before; import org.junit.Test; import com.google.appengine.api.datastore.DatastoreService; import com.google.appengine.api.datastore.DatastoreServiceFactory; import com.google.appengine.api.datastore.Entity; import com.google.appengine.api.datastore.Query; import com.google.appengine.tools.development.testing.LocalDatastoreServiceTestConfig; import com.google.appengine.tools.development.testing.LocalServiceTestHelper; public class MemberTest { private final LocalServiceTestHelper helper = new LocalServiceTestHelper(new LocalDatastoreServiceTestConfig()); @Before public void setUp() { helper.setUp(); } @After public void tearDown() { helper.tearDown(); } // run this test twice to prove we're not leaking any state across tests private void doTest() { DatastoreService ds = DatastoreServiceFactory.getDatastoreService(); assertEquals(0, ds.prepare(new Query("yam")).countEntities()); ds.put(new Entity("yam")); ds.put(new Entity("yam")); assertEquals(2, ds.prepare(new Query("yam")).countEntities()); } @Test public void testInsert1() { doTest(); } @Test public void testInsert2() { doTest(); } @Test public void foo() { assertEquals(4, 2 + 2); } }

    Read the article

  • integrating cc.net with uppercut

    - by deepasundarip
    Hi, I installed uppercut in my system successfully, Then i installed cc.net, for automated build revision number, I followed all the steps in the following site, http://ferventcoder.com/archive/2009/05/21/uppercut---automated-builds---cruisecontrol.net-integration.aspx The same config code in that site i used to integrate but still i could find the following error when i run the cc.net svn folder Unable to execute file [D:\CodeBuild\abc\svn]. The file may not exist or may not be executable. --- System.ComponentModel.Win32Exception: The system cannot find the file specified.. Is there any different procedure to install cc.net?? I just run the exe and it said set virtual memory manually, When does the build and revision number increase?? Please help me......... I m n trouble

    Read the article

  • How to pass custom options to configure when building a package with debuild?

    - by TestUser16418
    Short background: I'm using Debian Sid. Currently the audacity package is conflicting with the pidgin package, because gstreamer0.10-plugins-bad are outdated. I'm trying to rebuild it, but one of the unit tests is failing as one plugin I don't need is causing a segfault. I need to disable these tests, and there's a configure option for that, but I don't know how to pass it. So, how can I run configure with custom options? Either by passing them to debuild, or by editing some file in the debian directory? I only worked with Gentoo ebuilds so far, which are extremely simple compared to the Debian control files, which I still find completely undecipherable.

    Read the article

  • umount bind of stale NFS

    - by Paul Eisner
    i've got a problem removing mounts created with mount -o bind from a locally mounted NFS folder. Assume the following mount structure: NFS mounted directory: $ mount -o rw,soft,tcp,intr,timeo=10,retrans=2,retry=1 \ 10.20.0.1:/srv/source /srv/nfs-source Bound directory: $ mount -o bind /srv/nfs-source/sub1 /srv/bind-target/sub1 Which results in this mount map $ mount /dev/sda1 on / type ext3 (rw,errors=remount-ro) # ... 10.20.0.1:/srv/source on /srv/nfs-source type nfs (rw,soft,tcp,intr,timeo=10,retrans=2,retry=1,addr=10.20.0.100) /srv/nfs-source/sub1 on /srv/bind-target/sub1 type none (rw,bind) If the server (10.20.0.1) goes down (eg ifdown eth0), the handles become stale, which is expected. I can now un-mount the NFS mount with force $ umount -f /srv/nfs-source This takes some seconds, but works without any problems. However, i cannot un-mount the bound directory in /srv/bind-target/sub1. The forced umount results in: $ umount -f /srv/bind-target/sub1 umount2: Stale NFS file handle umount: /srv/bind-target/sub1: Stale NFS file handle umount2: Stale NFS file handle Here is a trace http://pastebin.com/ipvvrVmB I've tried umounting the sub-directories beforehand, find any processes accessing anything within the NFS or bind mounts (there are none). lsof also complains: $ lsof -n lsof: WARNING: can't stat() nfs file system /srv/nfs-source Output information may be incomplete. lsof: WARNING: can't stat() nfs file system /srv/bind-target/sub1 (deleted) Output information may be incomplete. lsof: WARNING: can't stat() nfs file system /srv/bind-target/ Output information may be incomplete. I've tried with recent stable Linux kernels 3.2.17, 3.2.19 and 3.3.8 (cannot use 3.4.x, cause need the grsecurity patch, which is not, yet, supported - grsecurity is not patched in in the tests above!). My nfs-utils are version 1.2.2 (debian stable). Does anybody have an idea how i can either: force the un-mount some other way? (any dirty trick is welcome, data loss or damage neglible at this point) use something else instead of mount -o bind? (cannot use soft links, cause mounted directories will be used in chroot; bindfs via FUSE is far to slow to be an option) Thanks, Paul Update 1 With 2.6.32.59 the umount of the (stale) sub-mounts work just fine. It seems to be a kernel regression bug. The above tests where with NFSv3. Additional tests with NFSv4 showed no change. Update 2 We have tested now multiple 2.6 and 3.x kernels and are now sure, that this was introduced in 3.0.x. We will fille a bug report, hopefully they figure it out.

    Read the article

  • How to setup a DotNetNuke Development Environment with Source Control?

    - by Joosh21
    My team is developing a new DotNetNuke web application and would like to know what is recommended to setup a development environment with source control and automated builds? We would like to keep the DNN source code separate from our custom modules and extensions source code. The DotNetNuke Compiled Module template for Visual Studio wants us to store the source code in the DesktopModules directory of the DNN source code and output to the DNN source code bin directory. Is this the recommended structure? I would rather keep the files in different locations, but then it becomes more difficult to run and debug locally as it would require an install of the module for each change. Also, how should an automated build deploy any changes? How have others set this up? Is there a recommended best practice?

    Read the article

  • dell u2410 3dMark Benchmark distortion problems

    - by Scanningcrew
    Ive been doing burn in testing for a new system I have put together and I am running into some video distortion problems with running the 3DMark benchmark tools (Both 06 and Vantage). The graphics will be fine, then sometimes during a test switch the screen will light up with thin horizontal ranibow lines (Something that looks very "glitchy") If i turn the monitor off and back on it clears up. All the tests "pass" and my system gets good marks but it concerns me if I might have problems with games (The screen returns to normal if I dont resest monitor and just let tests pass). I want to return a problem component now before its too late if it is something with the new hardware. Also, I am monitoring temp with thermal laser gun and the card itself is not going above 65c. Any ideas? System: Asrock x58 Xtreme - Last BIOS (1.80) EVGA Geforce GTX 285 w/ latest nvidia drivers (Connect via DVI1) Dell U2410(Set to 59hz refresh 1900x1202 -although I believe benchmarks run 1200x1024) Windows 7 Ultimate 64 12Gb DDR3 1600 RAM

    Read the article

  • Windows Experience Index could not be computed

    - by Alexey Ivanov
    I've upgraded recently from Windows Vista to Windows 8. When I try to rate my computer, it accesses DirectX 9 performance, then processes to DirectX 10 tests: And it gets stuck at this point. In 5–10 minutes, it shows error message: The video card is rather old: Mobile Intel 965 Express Chipset Family. I'm pretty sure it does not support DirectX 10. Why does Windows assess it with DirectX 10? And how can I make it skip DirectX 10 tests and get the system rating? The driver was installed automatically by Windows 8 from Windows Update. Version: 8.15.10.2697 Date: 10/01/2012

    Read the article

  • Testing install procedure of a program requiring administrative privileges

    - by Lucas Meijer
    I'm trying to write automated test, to ensure that the installer for my program works okay. The program can be installed for all users (requires admin privs), or for current user (does not require admin privs). The program can also autoupdate itself, which in some cases requires admin privileges, and in some cases doesn't. I'm looking for a way where I can have an automated test click "Yes, Allow" on the UAC dialogs, so I can write tests for all different scenarios, on many different operating systems, so that I can be confident when I make changes to the installer that I didn't break anything. Obviously, the installer process itself cannot do this. However, I control the complete machine, and could easily start some sort of daemon process with administrative rights, that the testprogram could make a socket connection to, to request it to "please click ok on the UAC now".

    Read the article

  • SVN check out to samba directory

    - by Jon H
    I'm trying to svn co to a directory on Ubuntu, shared via samba, to OS X, but I get the following error (in OS X). svn: In directory 'site/product/tests' svn: Can't open file 'site/product/tests/.svn/tmp/text-base/._base.py.svn-base': No such file or directory My smb.conf file includes the following changes: unix extensions = no browseable = yes public = yes writable = yes delete readonly = yes create mask = 0775 directory mask = 0775 valid users = %S read only = no The checkout works fine locally (on the Ubuntu machine). What am I missing? More detail: Later inspection showed that the svn error couldn't find the file with 3, then 2 underscores: .___init__.py.svn-base Whereas listing the directory in OS X showed 2, then 2 underscores: __init__.py.svn-base And listing the same directory in a successful checkout on Ubuntu shows nothing (because it's a temporary directory?) I've tried the mangled = no setting in share settings, to no effect.

    Read the article

  • Gitosis Directories of repositories per user?

    - by Ibrahim
    I was just wondering, is there a way to set up gitosis so that a user would have their own directory to which they could push any number of repositories that they want, and essentially have admin privs on that directory? This might be kind of confusing, but essentially I want something like how on github all your repositories are accessible at urls like [email protected]:username/repofoo.git . I realize that setting up each repo is a somewhat manual process that could be automated via a script, like I assume github does, but is there any way to do something like this overall, minus the automated repository creation? I guess I'm open to trying to set up gitorious or something if it allows this, but gitosis works pretty well for me right now and it was dead easy to set up, and I've heard that gitorious is not so easy. Thanks! I've heard of other forks/clones of gitosis that have per branch permissions like gitolite, but I'm not sure whether I want to use one of those unless they have other compelling features and are as well documented and easy to use as gitosis.

    Read the article

  • How to write specs with MSpec for code that changes Thread.CurrentPrincipal?

    - by Dan Jensen
    I've been converting some old specs to MSpec (were using NUnit/SpecUnit). The specs are for a view model, and the view model in question does some custom security checking. We have a helper method in our specs which will setup fake security credentials for the Thread.CurrentPrincipal. This worked fine in the old unit tests, but fails in MSpec. Specifically, I'm getting this exception: "System.Runtime.Serialization.SerializationException: Type is not resolved for member" It happens when part of the SUT tries to read the app config file. If I comment out the line which sets the CurrentPrincipal (or simply call it after the part that checks the config file), the error goes away, but the tests fail due to lack of credentials. Similarly, if I set the CurrentPrincipal to null, the error goes away, but again the tests fail because the credentials aren't set. I've googled this, and found some posts about making sure the custom principal is serializable when it crosses AppDomain boundaries (usually in reference to web apps). In our case, this is not a web app, and I'm not crossing any AppDomains. Our pincipal object is also serializable. I downloaded the source for MSpec, and found that the ConsoleRunner calls a class named AppDomainRunner. I haven't debugged into it, but it looks like it's running the specs in different app domains. So does anyone have any ideas on how I can overcome this? I really like MSpec, and would love to use it exclusively. But I need to be able to supply fake security credentials while running the tests. Thanks! Update: here's the spec class: [Subject(typeof(CountryPickerViewModel))] public class When_the_user_makes_a_selection : PickerViewModelSpecsBase { protected static CountryPickerViewModel picker; Establish context = () => { SetupFakeSecurityCredentials(); CreateFactoryStubs(); StubLookupServicer<ICountryLookupServicer>() .WithData(BuildActiveItems(new [] { "USA", "UK" })); picker = new CountryPickerViewModel(ViewFactory, ViewModelFactory, BusinessLogicFactory, CacheFactory); }; Because of = () => picker.SelectedItem = picker.Items[0]; Behaves_like<Picker_that_has_a_selected_item> a_picker_with_a_selection; } We have a number of these "picker" view models, all of which exhibit some common behavior. So I'm using the Behaviors feature of MSpec. This particular class is simulating the user selecting something from the (WPF) control which is bound to this VM. The SetupFakeSecurityCredentials() method is simply setting Thread.CurrentPrincipal to an instance of our custom principal, where the prinipal has been populated will full-access rights. Here's a fake CountryPickerViewModel which is enough to cause the error: public class CountryPickerViewModel { public CountryPickerViewModel(IViewFactory viewFactory, IViewModelFactory viewModelFactory, ICoreBusinessLogicFactory businessLogicFactory, ICacheFactory cacheFactory) { Items = new Collection<int>(); var validator = ValidationFactory.CreateValidator<object>(); } public int SelectedItem { get; set; } public Collection<int> Items { get; private set; } } It's the ValidationFactory call which blows up. ValidationFactory is an Enterprise Library object, which tries to access the config.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70  | Next Page >