karmic forge
Hi people 🖐️. Does anyone had a good Docker image to run Angular unit tests with the famous npm test -- --no-watch --no-progress --browsers=ChromeHeadless ?
I have experienced a bunch like timbru31/node-chrome, cypress/browsers and weboaks/node-karma-protractor-chrome but all of them requires to override karma config to add --no-sandox. I would like to rely only on Angular default karma config
opal phoenix
Hi people 🖐️. Does anyone had a good Docker image to run Angular unit tests wit...
Whats the problem with no-sandbox ?
It looks expected when u want to use headless.
And I think it's unrelated to the docker image.
I think it's fairly common to have CI specific test-runner-configuration.
So u can do:
npm run test
npm run test:ci
I would like to not be forced to ng g config karma in order to run my tests in CI. The --no-sandbox flag is only mandatory because of root user.
opal phoenix
I think having a CI specific config is less work than trying to fix this on the docker level.
The best you can do is create a non-root user I guess, which has additional complications.
karmic forge
Since I have been working with Angular I always have a specific config for CI but today I wonder, am I do it right ? Is there a way to simplify it ? The only additional config I need to run my tests is the "--no-sandbox" flag. A whole config file just for a flag caused by the use of "root" user... I though it was overkill or sort of
opal phoenix
Since I have been working with Angular I always have a specific config for CI bu...
I think having a CI specific config is the correct way.
karmic forge
But maybe I'm wrong, and as you said it's more complicated to fix the docker side
opal phoenix
Anyway, --no-sandbox for running tests against ChronmeHeadless in docker is 100% expected and very very common. Sure, ways around it I guess, but not the typical (and correct) solution.
A whole config file just for a flag caused by the use of "root" user... I though it was overkill or sort of
Trying to find a whole new docker image, just to avoid setting a flag that is expected, that sounds overkill.
The flag is unrelated to karma, but to chrome.
U can also not run in Chrome 😄
karmic forge
Ya I guess.
Talking about docker image, do you have a recommandation for one with nodejs and chrome ?
karmic forge
U can also not run in Chrome 😄
My whole dev stack is based on chrome XD
opal phoenix
Ya I guess.
Talking about docker image, do you have a recommandation for one wit...
This one looks okay https://github.com/timbru31/docker-node-chrome/blob/master/18/Dockerfile
As long as u use the 18 one
But I havent used it tho, sorry.
I prefer testing against more than just chrome 😄
karmic forge
Yes yes, my problem today is I can no longer rely on cypress/broswers as they use 20 for the latest chrome versions
opal phoenix
Yes yes, my problem today is I can no longer rely on cypress/broswers as they us...
Not sure what u mean.
U can always pin versions
karmic forge
Yes but If i want to stick to node 18, the available chrome versions are not the latests
opal phoenix
Yeah thats an issue you always have when relying on others.
Could just roll your own dockerfile.
karmic forge
This one looks okay https://github.com/timbru31/docker-node-chrome/blob/master/1...
Funny because I considered to migrate to it
karmic forge
Could just roll your own dockerfile.
Yes but it means building dockers image frequently...
opal phoenix
Yes but it means building dockers image frequently...
Wdym ?
karmic forge
You may want to test your app on the most recent browser and so build a docker image on each chrome release (which is quiet often these days)
opal phoenix
I think u want to use things like browserstack.
But regardless u can have full control over all versions when u use your own dockerfile
Either always use the latest
or pin it.
With Chrome, u should be okay to have a dockerfile that sticks to node 18 and installs the latest chrome on every CI run.
karmic forge
Like using a node:18 image and manually install chrome before running tests ?
karmic forge
Maybe it's a noob question but, you can base a CI job on a Dockerfile ?
opal phoenix
(could just use that dockerfile tho, I assume it sticks to 18)
Yeah u push to the gitlab registry.
Probably not worth it here tho, just use the one I linked.
karmic forge
Ah yes I get it. Actually the back-end team of my company use homemade docker images in their tests (using gitlab registry) and it's fine as their dependencies are fixed. On my front-end side, I would like to be sure that the app works well on the latest chrome versions (https://docs.angular.lat/guide/browser-support) and it's challenging to archive this goal without building countless images that's why I chose to rely on dockerhub to find pre-made image that fit my needs
opal phoenix
I honestly still do not understand what u mean with building countless images.
Just ensure to install the latest chrome everytime the container starts
And u use the latest chrome automatically
karmic forge
If today google release chrome X, I have to build an image with X
If tomorrow google release chrome X+1, repeat
karmic forge
I guess I didn't take enough step back to realize that I just need to install chrome will I'm running my tests instead of using a pre-made Docker image...
Just wanted to make my CI job fast XD
opal phoenix
Yeha you cant have everything.
Either u use a fixed version and optimize
or u use the latest version and suffer some hits.
karmic forge
Words of wisdom XD