Skip to content

fix warning rm -rf - #30

Open
MayssaRouissi wants to merge 3 commits into
virtual-imaging-platform:developfrom
MayssaRouissi:fix-failed-rm--rf
Open

MayssaRouissi wants to merge 3 commits into
virtual-imaging-platform:developfrom
MayssaRouissi:fix-failed-rm--rf

Conversation

@MayssaRouissi

Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

Comment thread pom.xml Outdated
<groupId>fr.insalyon.creatis</groupId>
<artifactId>gasw-batch-plugin</artifactId>
<version>1.3-SNAPSHOT</version>
<version>1.2.2</version>

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

dont change version


channel.open().verify(config.getOptions().getCommandExecutionTimeout(), TimeUnit.SECONDS);
channel.waitFor(EnumSet.of(ClientChannelEvent.CLOSED, ClientChannelEvent.EXIT_STATUS), config.getOptions().getSshEventTimeout());
final Set<ClientChannelEvent> events = channel.waitFor(

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

what is the timeout difference with the previous line ?
could we keep the same timeout (CommandExecutionTimeout) which is 10 seconds by default ?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  • the line (chanel.open().verify) only covers opening the channel while the waitFor covers the whole command execution until the exit status arrives.
  • the waitFor was using sshEvetTimeout (1000ms) whiwh is too short for a slow rm -rf
  • yes,we can keep the same option.
    ps: i think that we need to adjust also the executor.json and raise the value up to 10000

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants