process: Delete flaky and (now) unused test
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ use std::process::{Stdio, ExitStatus, Command};
use futures::future::Future;
use futures::stream::{self, Stream};
-use tokio_io::io::{read_until, write_all, read_to_end};
+use tokio_io::io::{read_until, write_all};
use tokio_process::{CommandExt, Child};
mod support;
@@ -85,38 +85,6 @@ fn feed_a_lot() {
assert_eq!(status.code(), Some(0));
}
-// FIXME: delete this test once we have a resolution for #51
-// This test's setup is flaky, and setting up a consistent test is nearly
-// impossible: right now we invoke `cat` and immediately kill it, expecting
-// that it didn't write anything, but if there's something wrong with the
-// command itself (e.g. redirection issues, it doesn't actually print anything
-// out, etc.) this test can falsely pass. Attempting a solution which writes
-// some data, *then* kill the child, write more data, and assert that only the
-// first write is echoed back seems like a good approach, however, due to the
-// ordering of context switches or how the kernel buffers data we can get
-// inconsistent results. We can keep this test around for now, but as soon as
-// we have a solution for #51, we may have a better avenue for testing this
-// functionality.
-#[test]
-fn drop_kills() {
- let mut child = cat().spawn_async().unwrap();
- let stdin = child.stdin().take().unwrap();
- let stdout = child.stdout().take().unwrap();
- drop(child);
-
- // Ignore all write errors since we expect a broken pipe here
- let writer = write_all(stdin, b"1234").then(|_| Ok(()));
- let reader = read_to_end(stdout, Vec::new());
-
- let (_, output) = support::CurrentThreadRuntime::new()
- .expect("failed to get rt")
- .spawn(writer)
- .block_on(support::with_timeout(reader))
- .expect("failed to get output");
-
- assert_eq!(output.len(), 0);
-}
-
#[test]
fn wait_with_output_captures() {
let mut child = cat().spawn_async().unwrap();
