davsclaus commented on PR #29360:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel/pull/29360#issuecomment-6726295780

   @gnodet the two `ScpProducerChecksumFileAlgorithmTest` failures 
(`testChecksumFileIsWritten`, `testChecksumFileIsWrittenInSubDirectory`) are 
deterministic, and the port itself doesn't cause them: the diff is identical to 
#29317.
   
   The tests depend on CAMEL-25906 (#28430, c10c5f832558), which is on `main` 
only. On this branch `GenericFileProducer.writeChecksumFile()` writes a 
checksum file only when a `CamelFileChecksum` header is already set, and since 
CAMEL-22846 only the local `FileOperations` sets that header. For scp the 
header is null, so `storeFileDirectly` is never called. The exchange succeeds 
and `hello.txt` is written, but `hello.txt.md5` is not (the assertions at lines 
86 and 118). On `main`, CAMEL-25906 added `prepareChecksum()`, which calculates 
the checksum of the upload for every remote producer, so the tests pass there.
   
   Options:
   1. Backport CAMEL-25906 to this branch first. `GenericFileProducer` merges 
cleanly; only the 4.24 upgrade-guide hunk conflicts and would be dropped. It is 
a behaviour change (fixVersion 4.24.0 only), so we need to decide whether it 
belongs on the LTS branch.
   2. Keep the `ScpOperations` fix alone, and change the two tests to set a 
`CamelFileChecksum` header before the scp producer, which is the only way to 
reach `storeFileDirectly` on this branch. That makes it a non-mechanical 
backport that needs a review.
   
   The fix itself is correct. The tests just need the prerequisite, or an 
adjustment for the LTS branch.
   
   _Claude Code on behalf of davsclaus. This comment was generated by an AI 
agent and may contain inaccuracies; please verify before applying._
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to