rspec (2.0.0.beta.19)
rails (3.0.0)
authlogic (2.1.6)
bartt-ssl_requirement (1.2.3)
RUBYGEMS VERSION: 1.3.7
RUBY VERSION: 1.8.7 (2009-06-12 patchlevel 174) [i686-darwin10.4.0]
Hi,
I’m getting different results when running a Rails 3 scaffold generated
controller example depending on whether or not I run ‘rspec spec’ or
‘rspec
spec/controllers’. The difference occurs when evaluating the dynamic
route
methods with for ‘_url’, e.g. my_model_url I’m using Authlogic and
SslRequirement as well. The issue may be in either of those libraries,
but the
only difference is how I run the spec suite. I disable the Ssl
requirement
check in the test.rb environment file.
Assume I generated the scaffold code with: “rails g scaffold scaffold”
to
create a “Scaffold” model.
See relevant code here: url_for scaffold failure · GitHub
When I run ‘rspec spec/controllers’, the example in question passes. I
placed
debug code in url_for.rb (bartt-ssl_requirement-1.2.3) to parse the
options
passed to url_for and they include the :host and :protocol parameters,
:host =>
“test.host”, :protocol => “http://”.
When I run ‘rspec spec’, the example in question fails. The url_for
options
are missing both the :host and :protocol parameters. If I manully pass
those
into the my_model_url method, the example will pass. If I use the
_path
version of the route method, the example passes.
The stack trace in the failing case is (path to gems directory omitted):
- ScaffoldsController POST create with valid params redirects to the
created
scaffold
Failure/Error: response.should
redirect_to(scaffold_url(mock_scaffold))
Missing host to link to! Please provide :host parameter or set
default_url_options[:host]
…/actionpack-3.0.0/lib/action_dispatch/routing/route_set.rb:473:in
url_for_without_non_ssl_host' # .../bartt-ssl_requirement-1.2.3/lib/url_for.rb:44:in url_for_without_secure_option’
# …/gems/bartt-ssl_requirement-1.2.3/lib/url_for.rb:32:in
url_for' # .../actionpack-3.0.0/lib/action_dispatch/routing/url_for.rb:132:in url_for’
#
…/actionpack-3.0.0/lib/action_dispatch/routing/route_set.rb:195:in
factor_library_url' # ./spec/controllers/scaffolds_controller_spec.rb:70 # .../activesupport-3.0.0/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:239:in inject’
So, I’m stumped as to why ‘rspec spec’ is behaving differently from
‘rspec
spec/controllers’ with respect to generating the appropriate url_for
options.
Thanks!
Michael
On Sep 15, 2010, at 1:05 PM, Michael K. wrote:
Failure/Error: response.should redirect_to(scaffold_url(mock_scaffold))
Missing host to link to! Please provide :host parameter or set default_url_options[:host]
# .../actionpack-3.0.0/lib/action_dispatch/routing/route_set.rb:473:in `url_for_without_non_ssl_host'
# .../bartt-ssl_requirement-1.2.3/lib/url_for.rb:44:in `url_for_without_secure_option'
# .../gems/bartt-ssl_requirement-1.2.3/lib/url_for.rb:32:in `url_for'
# .../actionpack-3.0.0/lib/action_dispatch/routing/url_for.rb:132:in `url_for'
# .../actionpack-3.0.0/lib/action_dispatch/routing/route_set.rb:195:in `factor_library_url'
# ./spec/controllers/scaffolds_controller_spec.rb:70
# .../activesupport-3.0.0/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:239:in `inject'
So, I’m stumped as to why ‘rspec spec’ is behaving differently from ‘rspec spec/controllers’ with respect to generating the appropriate url_for options.
This sort of problem usually boils down to something interacting with
global state - something that is only getting loaded when you run the
full suite. To narrow it down, try running subsets of the directories:
rspec spec/controllers spec/requests
rspec spec/controllers spec/views
rspec spec/controllers spec/models
etc
HTH,
David
On Sep 16, 2010, at 1:44 AM, Michael K. wrote:
bartt-ssl_requirement (1.2.3)
# .../gems/bartt-ssl_requirement-1.2.3/lib/url_for.rb:32:in `url_for'
rspec spec/controllers spec/requests
Any idea why including url_helpers in the model spec causes this particular issue? It would be nice if there wasn’t a conflict. I haven’t traced through it enough to understand why the conflict occurs.
Rails.application.routes.url_helpers is a global object, so if the spec
is doing anything to change its state that might cause trouble. That’s
all I can think of. How are you including them?
From: David C. [email protected]
To: rspec-users [email protected]
Sent: Thu, September 16, 2010 4:59:26 AM
Subject: Re: [rspec-users] [rails] url_for host and protocol not set
when full
spec suite run
On Sep 16, 2010, at 1:44 AM, Michael K. wrote:
From: David C. [email protected]
rails (3.0.0)
methods with for ‘_url’, e.g. my_model_url I’m using Authlogic and
debug code in url_for.rb (bartt-ssl_requirement-1.2.3) to parse the options
scaffold
…/actionpack-3.0.0/lib/action_dispatch/routing/route_set.rb:195:in
This sort of problem usually boils down to something interacting with global
hard-coding what the expected route should be.
Any idea why including url_helpers in the model spec causes this particular
issue? It would be nice if there wasn’t a conflict. I haven’t traced through
it enough to understand why the conflict occurs.
Rails.application.routes.url_helpers is a global object, so if the spec
is doing
anything to change its state that might cause trouble. That’s all I can
think
of. How are you including them?
I was including them with “include Rails.application.routes.url_helpers”
which
is the Rails 3 recommendation as specified in
ActionController::UrlWriter
From: David C. [email protected]
To: rspec-users [email protected]
Sent: Wed, September 15, 2010 8:51:48 PM
Subject: Re: [rspec-users] [rails] url_for host and protocol not set
when full
spec suite run
On Sep 15, 2010, at 1:05 PM, Michael K. wrote:
rspec (2.0.0.beta.19)
spec/controllers’. The difference occurs when evaluating the dynamic route
When I run ‘rspec spec/controllers’, the example in question passes. I placed
- ScaffoldsController POST create with valid params redirects to the created
`url_for’
…/actionpack-3.0.0/lib/action_dispatch/routing/route_set.rb:195:in
`factor_library_url’
./spec/controllers/scaffolds_controller_spec.rb:70
…/activesupport-3.0.0/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:239:in
`inject’
So, I’m stumped as to why ‘rspec spec’ is behaving differently from ‘rspec
spec/controllers’ with respect to generating the appropriate url_for options.
This sort of problem usually boils down to something interacting with
global
state - something that is only getting loaded when you run the full
suite. To
narrow it down, try running subsets of the directories:
rspec spec/controllers spec/requests
rspec spec/controllers spec/views
rspec spec/controllers spec/models
etc
HTH,
David
David, thanks for the suggestion. One of my model specs was including
Rails.application.routes.url_helpers, so it could evaluate route paths
(b/c one
of my models is doing the same, unusual, but supported). Removing the
include
fixed the controller spec problem mentioned previously. Of course this
broke
the model spec that needed url_helpers, but I was able to work around it
by
hard-coding what the expected route should be.
Any idea why including url_helpers in the model spec causes this
particular
issue? It would be nice if there wasn’t a conflict. I haven’t traced
through
it enough to understand why the conflict occurs.
Thanks again.
Michael