Repository navigation
Check the reserved ports' guarantees, not exact numbers - #265
Merged
Merged
Conversation
reserve-network-port skips ports another process holds; on a CI runner 40000 was taken and the plugin correctly returned 40001-40003.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
reserve-ports-with-minasserted exact ports, butreserve-network-portskips any port another process holds. On a Linux runner something held 40000, the plugin correctly returned 40001–40003, and the IT failed master (run 38399321483). The verify script now checks what the goal promises: every port at or above itsminPortNumber, all nine distinct, and increasing within each range.Verified:
mvn -P run-its verify -Dinvoker.test=reserve-ports-with-min→ passes on Maven 3.9.16 and JDK 17.