The flatmap shim was lazily adding duplicate items and letting cty.Set
clear them out, but if those duplicates contains unknown values they
can't be checked for equality and will end up remaining in the set.
Some other test is leaving behind a terraform.tfstate after it concludes,
which can cause this test to fail in a strange way due to picking up
extra provider requirements from that state.
This check doesn't fix that problem, but it at least makes the test fail
in a more helpful way to avoid time wasted trying to debug this test when
it's some other test that actually has the bug.
This test is currently failing due to the command completing successfully,
which would previously cause a panic because we didn't properly initialize
the MockUi and so its error buffer is nil unless written to.
(The failure this was masking will be fixed in a subsequent commit.)
In prior refactoring we lost the required core version check from
"terraform init", which we restore here.
Additionally, this test used to have an incorrect name that suggested it
was testing something in the "getProvider" codepath, but version checking
happens regardless of what other options are selected.
After all of the refactoring we were no longer checking the Terraform
version field in a state file, causing this test to fail.
This restores that check, though with a slightly different error message.
This test was using old-style state files as its input, differing only by
lineage. Since lineages are now managed within the state manager itself,
the test can't use that to distinguish the two files and so we put a
different output in each one instead.
This also introduces some TRACE logging to the migration codepaths.
There's some hard-to-follow control flow here and so this extra logging
helps to understand the reason for a particular outcome, and since this
codepath is visited only in "terraform init" anyway it doesn't hurt to
be a bit more verbose here.
In the refactoring for new HCL this codepath stopped taking into account
changes to the CLI -backend-config options when deciding if a backend
migration is required.
This restores that behavior in a different way than it used to be: rather
than re-hashing the merged config and comparing the hashes, we instead
just compare directly the configuration values, which must be exactly
equal in order to skip migration.
This change is covered by the test TestInit_inputFalse, although as of
this commit it is still not passing due a downstream problem within the
migration code itself.
This test was re-using the same InitCommand value to run multiple times,
which is not realistic. Since we now cache configuration source code
inside command.Meta on load, it's important that we use a fresh
InitCommand instance here so it'll see the modified configuration file
we've left on disk.
Here we were going to the trouble of copying the body so we could mutate
it, but then ended up mutating the original anyway and then returning the
unmodified copy. Whoops!
This fix is verified by a number of "init" command tests that exercise the
-backend-config option, including TestInit_backendConfigFile and several
others whose names have the prefix TestInit_backendConfig .
Since our new approach here works by installing with a synthetic module
configuration block, we need to treat relative paths as a special case
for two reasons:
- Relative paths in module addresses are relative to the file containing
the call rather than the working directory, but -from-module uses the
working directory (and the call is in a synthetic "file" anyway)
- We need to force Terraform to pass the path through to go-getter rather
than just treating it as a relative reference, since we really do want
a copy of the directory in this case, even if it is local.
To address both of these things, we'll detect a relative path and turn it
into an absolute path before beginning installation. This is a bit hacky,
but this is consistent with the general philosophy of the -from-module
implementation where it does hacky things so that the rest of the
installer code can be spared of dealing with its special cases.
This is covered by a couple of existing tests that run init -from-module,
including TestInit_fromModule_dstInSrc which now passes.
When we originally wrote this message we struggled a bit for how to refer
to the releases server without writing an awkwardly-ungrammatical
sentence, and so "the official repository" became a placeholder name for
it.
Now that we'll be looking in Terraform Registry this gives us a nice
proper noun to use. This message will need to evolve more as our
integration with the registry gets more sophisticated, but for now this
works.
Some over-zealous bulk updating of this test file caused this test to be
producing a remote state config cache file on disk when it doesn't
actually need one: the backend config comes from the plan file when
applying a saved plan.
Some merging conflict shenanigans here led to this usage not lining up
with the imported symbol name, meaning that the tests couldn't compile any
more.
We've missed a few recent additions to go.mod in the vendor directory. We
need to keep this updated for the moment until all of the surrounding
tooling is ready to go all-in with Go 1.11 modules.
We missed fixing this up during the big updates for the new plan/state
models since the failures were being masked by testBackendState being
broken.
This is the same sort of update made to many other tests: add schema to
the mock provider, adjust for the new plan/state types, and make
allowances for the new built-in diffing behavior in core.
The hashing function for cached backend configuration is different now, so
our hard-coded hash of the HTTP backend address wasn't working anymore.
Here we update the hash so that tests using this test backend will work
again. Rather than leaving it hard-coded, we'll instead compute it the
same way as "terraform init" would.
In practice only one test is actually using this function right now, so
we also update the test fixture for that test (TestPlan_outBackend) to
match the new expectations, though as of this commit it's still failing
with an unrelated error.
The mission of this process method used to include dealing with
auto-loaded tfvars files, but it doesn't do that anymore.
It does still deal with the -no-color option, but the test wasn't
exercising that part before.
Now the test here focuses on the -no-color behavior.
The process method still has a "vars" flag argument which is no longer
used. Since this is an unexported method we could potentially address this
but this commit is intentionally limited only to fixing the test.
Comments here indicate that this was erroneously returning an error but
we accepted it anyway to get the tests passing again after other work.
The tests over in the "terraform" package agree that cancelling should be
a successful outcome rather than an error.
I think that cancelling _should_ actually be an error, since Terraform did
not complete the operation it set out to complete, but that's a change
we'd need to make cautiously since automation wrapper scripts may be
depending on the success-on-cancel behavior.
Therefore this just fixes the command package test to agree with the
Terraform package tests and adds some FIXME notes to capture the potential
that we might want to update this later.
The State.Equal function is now more precise than this test needs. It's
only trying to distinguish between an empty state and a non-empty state,
so the string representation of state is good enough to get that done
while disregarding other subtle differences.
If the user uses the auto-expire value in the backend/swift settings
then swift will automatically delete their Statefile which is likely
something the user doesn't want given how Terraform works.
The "values" function wasn't producing consistently-ordered keys in its
result, leading to crashes. This fixes#19204.
While working on these functions anyway, this also improves slightly their
precision when working with object types, where we can produce a more
complete result for unknown values because the attribute names are part
of the type. We can also produce results for known maps that have unknown
elements; these unknowns will also appear in the values(...) result,
allowing them to propagate through expressions.
Finally, this adds a few more test cases to try different permutations
of empty and unknown values.
When the value we're looking in has an object type, we need to know the
key in order to decide the result type. Therefore an object lookup with
an unknown key must produce cty.DynamicVal, not an unknown value with a
known type.
James Bardin