test: improve coverage of lib/fs.js#38604
Conversation
test/parallel/test-fs-write-file.js
Outdated
| const readOnlyOption = { mode: fs.constants.O_RDONLY, flag: 'r' }; | ||
| fs.writeFile(filename3, s, readOnlyOption, common.expectsError({ | ||
| code: 'EBADF', | ||
| message: 'EBADF: bad file descriptor, write' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not a change to make in this PR, but I wonder if that error message could be improved. Unless I'm misunderstanding, the problem from the user perspective is mode/permissions and not that the file descriptor is bad.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agreed. Since writeFile(fd) and writeFile(path) share the same util function writeAll, this change may need a refactor.
I'll open an issue to track it and look into it later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
According to https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/write.2.html:
EBADF: fd is not a valid file descriptor or is not open for writing.EPERM: The operation was prevented by a file seal; see fcntl(2).
Considering that the file has been opened in the read-only mode and the program is attempting to write to it, isn't EBADF more appropriate here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess the point is that it's a writeFile operation in the user perspective, but the current error is about file descriptor, which may causes confusing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This function just reflects the error that is returned from uv_fs_write, which again reflects the error the OS returns. I don't think we replace the error codes for the other functions, so doing it for this particular function feels a little odd, don't you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@pd4d10 This test is failing for Windows. Could you please update it to expect an EPERM for Windows?
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Removing the |
Co-authored-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com>
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Landed in a1f590e |
PR-URL: #38604 Refs: https://coverage.nodejs.org/coverage-29f1b609ba5d12d3/lib/fs.js.html#L2045 Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com>
PR-URL: #38604 Refs: https://coverage.nodejs.org/coverage-29f1b609ba5d12d3/lib/fs.js.html#L2045 Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com>
|
This lands cleanly on v14.x-staging but the modified test fails I tried adding at the beginning of the test file but still get an error: |
Refs:
https://coverage.nodejs.org/coverage-29f1b609ba5d12d3/lib/fs.js.html#L2045
https://coverage.nodejs.org/coverage-29f1b609ba5d12d3/lib/fs.js.html#L2056