Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Tests Failing -- TestBadRoundTripDial #471

Open
MLCarey321 opened this issue Jun 8, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Tests Failing -- TestBadRoundTripDial #471

MLCarey321 opened this issue Jun 8, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@MLCarey321
Copy link

MLCarey321 commented Jun 8, 2024

The following error is occurring when running make test locally:

--- FAIL: TestBadRoundTripDial (0.75s)
    client_test.go:392: 
        	Error Trace:	/aws-xray-sdk-go/xray/client_test.go:392
        	Error:      	An error is expected but got nil.
        	Test:       	TestBadRoundTripDial
panic: runtime error: invalid memory address or nil pointer dereference [recovered]
	panic: runtime error: invalid memory address or nil pointer dereference
[signal SIGSEGV: segmentation violation code=0x2 addr=0x30 pc=0x1015da690]

goroutine 511 [running]:
testing.tRunner.func1.2({0x101bad600, 0x102373e90})
	/opt/homebrew/Cellar/go/1.22.4/libexec/src/testing/testing.go:1631 +0x1c4
testing.tRunner.func1()
	/opt/homebrew/Cellar/go/1.22.4/libexec/src/testing/testing.go:1634 +0x33c
panic({0x101bad600?, 0x102373e90?})
	/opt/homebrew/Cellar/go/1.22.4/libexec/src/runtime/panic.go:770 +0x124
github.com/aws/aws-xray-sdk-go/xray.TestBadRoundTripDial(0x140009881a0)
	/Users/iuh483/repos/aws-xray-sdk-go/xray/client_test.go:400 +0x310
testing.tRunner(0x140009881a0, 0x101cb8850)
	/opt/homebrew/Cellar/go/1.22.4/libexec/src/testing/testing.go:1689 +0xec
created by testing.(*T).Run in goroutine 1
	/opt/homebrew/Cellar/go/1.22.4/libexec/src/testing/testing.go:1742 +0x318
FAIL	github.com/aws/aws-xray-sdk-go/xray	2.158s
FAIL
make: *** [test] Error 1
@MLCarey321
Copy link
Author

I'm confused -- what exactly is the error that's expected? Right now, the test results in a 404 response with no error, which is actually what I'd expect given how the request is being built.

This was referenced Jun 11, 2024
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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant