From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4820B1FF0A7 for ; Wed, 02 Sep 2026 11:10:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 204F721262; Wed, 02 Sep 2026 11:10:26 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2026 11:10:18 +0200 Message-Id: Subject: applied: [PATCH datacenter-manager] tests: use tempfile instead using our own, in-tree reimplementation From: "Lukas Wagner" To: X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0-0-g5549850facc2-dirty References: <20260804123452.1077660-1-l.wagner@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20260804123452.1077660-1-l.wagner@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1788340214807 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.546 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: 7ED3YX7NBM7HH6QA6Y47WS4ID5XB4KOH X-Message-ID-Hash: 7ED3YX7NBM7HH6QA6Y47WS4ID5XB4KOH X-MailFrom: l.wagner@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Datacenter Manager development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Tue Aug 4, 2026 at 2:34 PM CEST, Lukas Wagner wrote: > PBS started using it a while ago for tests, and also the > `namespaced_cache` in PDM already used it for its own test suite. > went ahead and applied this one after reviewing the diff again, it's only touching test code anyway.