-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 45
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
General improvements to memfs #50
Conversation
A recent change (9a476c0) short-circuited when trying to open symlink file that pointed to self by returning an os.ErrNotExist. This change stops returning the error, returning the original symlink file instead Signed-off-by: Paulo Gomes <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Paulo Gomes <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Paulo Gomes <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Paulo Gomes <[email protected]>
This change ensures that symlinks are not resolved when creating a new symlink. This aligns with the behaviour of osfs. Signed-off-by: Paulo Gomes <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Paulo Gomes <[email protected]>
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.
I wonder if we should drop the dependency on os
and filepath
? The implementation should be OS-independent since memory across all is the same. We could replace filepath
with path
, use the same separator = '/'
, and replace os
errors with fs
@@ -5,15 +5,15 @@ jobs: | |||
test: | |||
strategy: | |||
matrix: | |||
go-version: [1.20.x,1.21.x] | |||
go-version: [1.20.x,1.21.x,1.22.x] |
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.
Perhaps ^1
to use the latest cached version?
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 you mean, have a single ^1.20.x
for the latest cached version or to do that across the matrix range?
In the past, go-billy
broke on Windows for specific Go minors, so it would be good to ensure we keep the last 3 minors.
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.
But then we'd need to constantly update the workflows. Instead, we can use [^1, ...]
and whatever specific Go versions we need to test against (i.e. the ones that broke in the past)
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.
Ok, let's give it a go on a follow-up PR.
@@ -5,9 +5,12 @@ jobs: | |||
test: | |||
strategy: | |||
matrix: | |||
go-version: [1.20.x,1.21.x] | |||
go-version: [1.21.x,1.22.x] |
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.
ditto
@@ -5,9 +5,12 @@ jobs: | |||
test: | |||
strategy: | |||
matrix: | |||
go-version: [1.21.x] | |||
go-version: [1.21.x,1.22.x] |
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.
ditto
Signed-off-by: Paulo Gomes <[email protected]>
Completely agree with that - in I looked into this and kept the existing behaviour behind a |
No description provided.