... instead of relying on the filesystem(!) ordering, which will look
random to both users and unittests.
Also partially revert the test changes from
c5a7bcd50e /
https://gitlab.com/apparmor/apparmor/-/merge_requests/548 -
sorting the result only in the tests is a bad idea.
With the includes rule class landing, this particular test failed
in a test vm due to the sort ordering being different. It's not
clear that there should be an expectation of ordering returned from
get_full_paths(), so sort the result.
Signed-off-by: Steve Beattie <steve.beattie@canonical.com>
Acked-by: John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>
MR: https://gitlab.com/apparmor/apparmor/-/merge_requests/548
This function returns a list of paths for an include rule. This can be
- a single path if the include file is a file and exists
- a single path if the include file doesn't exist, but doesn't have
'if exists' (this will cause a 'file not found' error when used)
- a list of paths if the include is a directory
- an empty list if the rule has 'if exists' and the file doesn't exist
Also add some tests for get_full_paths()
This is similar to get_clean(), but keeps the original rule order
instead of sorting them.
This is useful for include rules in the preamble, where the order might
be relevant - for example if the first include defines a variable that
is then used or extended in the second include file.
These classes are meant to handle 'include' and 'include if exists'
rules.
Due to restrictions in re_match_include_parse(), some cases in
is_covered_localvars() and is_equal_localvars() can't be reached in the
unittests.
Also, IncludeRule isn't used in aa-logprof (yet?), which means
logprof_header_localvars() result format isn't decided yet, and
therefore not tested.
This means test coverage for the new classes isn't 100% this time ;-)
