test: Actually fail when a python unit test fails #29068

1. 
   maflcko commented at 8:19 pm on December 12, 2023: member

   Currently python unit test failures are ignored.

   Fix this.

2. test: Actually fail when a python unit test fails fa0534d7e4
3. 
   DrahtBot commented at 8:19 pm on December 12, 2023: contributor

   The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

   Code Coverage

   For detailed information about the code coverage, see the test coverage report.

   Reviews

   See the guideline for information on the review process.

   Type	Reviewers
   ACK	theStack, BrandonOdiwuor

   If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.

4. DrahtBot added the label Tests on Dec 12, 2023
5. 
   maflcko commented at 8:20 pm on December 12, 2023: member

   Can be tested with something like:

    0diff --git a/test/functional/test_framework/crypto/bip324_cipher.py b/test/functional/test_framework/crypto/bip324_cipher.py
    1index 56190647f2..56211e231d 100644
    2--- a/test/functional/test_framework/crypto/bip324_cipher.py
    3+++ b/test/functional/test_framework/crypto/bip324_cipher.py
    4@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ class FSChaCha20Poly1305:
    5 # Test vectors from RFC8439 consisting of plaintext, aad, 32 byte key, 12 byte nonce and ciphertext
    6 AEAD_TESTS = [
    7     # RFC 8439 Example from section 2.8.2
    8-    ["4c616469657320616e642047656e746c656d656e206f662074686520636c6173"
    9+    ["5c616469657320616e642047656e746c656d656e206f662074686520636c6173"
   10      "73206f66202739393a204966204920636f756c64206f6666657220796f75206f"
   11      "6e6c79206f6e652074697020666f7220746865206675747572652c2073756e73"
   12      "637265656e20776f756c642062652069742e",
   

   And then calling ./test/functional/test_runner.py ; echo $?

6. 
   maflcko commented at 8:21 pm on December 12, 2023: member

   Fun fact: This problem would not exist in a type-safe language.
7. theStack approved
8. 
   theStack commented at 0:25 am on December 13, 2023: contributor

   ACK fa0534d7e47d44428d3f9dea6d2f6b8e86df22d4
9. BrandonOdiwuor approved
10. 
    BrandonOdiwuor commented at 6:36 am on December 13, 2023: contributor

    ACK fa0534d7e47d44428d3f9dea6d2f6b8e86df22d4
11. 
    fanquake commented at 11:21 am on December 13, 2023: member

    Fun fact: This problem would not exist in a type-safe language.

    It’s time to start rewriting code in such a language.

12. fanquake merged this on Dec 13, 2023
13. fanquake closed this on Dec 13, 2023

    ---

14. maflcko deleted the branch on Dec 13, 2023
15. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit b642729e71 on Oct 24, 2024
16. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit 2b8ec6d366 on Oct 24, 2024
17. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit e6f19e7760 on Oct 24, 2024
18. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit a67319351a on Oct 24, 2024
19. bitcoin locked this on Dec 12, 2024

Contributors
maflcko DrahtBot theStack BrandonOdiwuor fanquake

Labels
Tests