[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Adding autopkgtest to Orthanc-python



Dear all,

This error indicates that two instances of Orthanc are running at the same time, most probably because the "orthanc" Debian service is not stopped at the beginning of the test by autopkgtests.

I indeed do not see any call to "systemctl stop orthanc" in the main script "debian/tests/run-unit-test" [1], is this expected?

I also don't understand how "debian/tests/run-unit-test" starts Orthanc. By using "Orthanc ./configuration.json --verbose", the script will not progress until Orthanc is manually stopped. From my understanding, Orthanc should instead be launched in the background (i.e., by adding an ampersand).

Furthermore, before making a call to "http://localhost:8042/toto"; (which is added by the Python plugin), the test script should wait until Orthanc is actually started. This can be tested by an (infinite) loop testing whether the Orthanc PID is still existent, while waiting until "http://localhost:8042/system"; answers (this is a route that is built in Orthanc).

However, as stated in another thread [2], I have strictly no experience with autopkgtests, so I cannot help readily here.

Kind Regards,
Sébastien-


[1] https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/orthanc-python/-/commit/9e751a67614e90d383956f400906ce8121bcfc81
[2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-med/2023/10/msg00017.html



On 20/10/23 18:28, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> writes:

I have no idea what this might mean.  Could you have a look at the
test?  I also realised that you are installing

There's a more specific error a few lines up:

   E1020 09:35:18.908283 OrthancException.cpp:61] The TCP port of the DICOM server is privileged or already in use:  (port = 4242) cannot create network: TCP Initialization Error: Address already in use

I don't know what else would be listening there, though, or if the
actual issue is that the container doesn't allow listening for network
connections at all, though in that case I might have expected a more
appropriate error code.



Reply to: