[test-unit-users-en:00047] Re: Should tests be sandboxed by default?

[Daniel Berger]

2011/2/25 Kouhei Sutou <kou at cozmixng.org>:
> Hi,
>
> In <1298419580.1861.71.camel at globe-hw4whh1>
>  "[test-unit-users-en:00045] Should tests be sandboxed by default?" on Tue, 22 Feb 2011 17:06:20 -0700,
>  Daniel Berger <dberger at globe.gov> wrote:
>
>> I was just looking at http://www.gem-testers.org/ and one of the caveats
>> on that page says, "Ensure rake test works and doesn’t wipe out
>> filesystems, databases, etc. Move those tests to another task."
>
> It's interesting.
>
>> What if we wrap all tests in a sandbox somehow? I see a few "sandbox"
>> gems out on rubygems. Would using them be an option?
>
> Could you tell us the gems? We may support one of them.

There's a couple out there that may fit, though I haven't deeply
investigated any of these. I see a "sandbox" library, that's a local
filesystem wrapper in /tmp I think. There's also a couple "safe"
libraries, e.g. safe_shell, safe_eval, and Safebox that may do the
job.

>> Or do you feel that this is up to the gem-testers people to handle?
>
> It seems that "sandbox" is helpful for non gem-testers
> people.

True enough. :)

Regards,

Dan