fix: startfile mock on non-win platforms #15
Merged
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
Signed-off-by: Samuel Anderson <samcan@amazon.com>
mwiebe
approved these changes
Sep 8, 2023
amarsjac
approved these changes
Sep 8, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What was the problem/requirement? (What/Why)
One job-bundle fails on non windows platform because a platform-dependent attribute will not exist and cannot be mocked.
What was the solution? (How)
Add
create=Trueto the mock call. This will create the attribute on linux/macOS. Could also conditionally mock but in my opinion would look more ugly and this does not harm anything.What is the impact of this change?
Unblock this test on linux/mac
How was this change tested?
Did you run the "Job Bundle Output Tests"? If not, why not? If so, paste the test results here.
No, because this does not change job-bundle related code and this change is simple enough to not warrant it.
Was this change documented?
No
Is this a breaking change?
No