similar to: route_for and nested resources

Hello, all, I have this error with my rspec - controller - test, and yes, I do found the thread with the same error here, but it isn''t helped me, think it''s not my case. i have rails -v = Rails 3.0.0.rc, rspec -v = 2.0.0.beta.18 (hope they should match each other). my test is here: spec/controllers/posts_controller_spec.rb and i ran it with command: rspec

Hey all, Just a heads up that the ZenTest-3.9.0 release is not compatible with RSpec-1.1.2. I thought I had a release ready to go, but differences between a preview release of ZenTest that I received and the actual release seem to have broken compatibility. We''ll get this resolved soon, but in the mean time please hold off on upgrading to ZenTest-3.9.0 if you''re using RSpec.

It seems to me that the RSpec bundle''s ''it'' snippet is in need of some love. By default, a newly inserted spec passes. This seems odd as it is misleading. It also makes it harder find what specs still need to be completed if you return to an RSpec module after a break. I propose that the ''it'' snippet is changed to the following: it

Trying the next release of rspec, I have had to make changes in the existing specs for routing. I have written an script with sed that makes this automatically (two files) spec/upgrade.sed ================ /route_for/s/id => 1/id => "1"/g /route_for.*create/s/== \(["''].*["'']\)/== {:path => \1, :method => :post}/ /route_for.*update/s/==

Hi, I got the resource "Llamadas" nested in: - Operadores - Productos - Centros Here is part of my routes http://pastie.caboo.se/92767 I want to spec that the routes for Llamadas, I tried several approachs: - route_for(:controller => "llamadas", :action => "exitosas", :operador_id => 1).should == "/operador/1/llamadas;exitosas" -

I''ve been looking for the definitive answer for months now, and the RSpec book doesn''t touch on it at all: How do we now handle stubbing out rendering of partials in view specs in RSpec2? I have a large (35K+ lines of views and related specs) that I''m trying to upgrade to Rails3/RSpec2. My views use partials pretty extensively and this issue is a huge blocker for me.

Is there some reason that the rspec resource generator produces code like this: context "Routes for the AnimalsController should map" do controller_name :animals specify "{ :controller => ''animals'', :action => ''index'' } to / animals" do route_for(:controller => "animals", :action =>

Hello all, I have a spec for a route that used to pass under Rails 2.2.2 and rspec 1.1.12, but can?t figure out what is wrong since I updated. Here is the assertion: route_for( { :controller => ''purchase_orders'', :action => ''update'', :company_id => "32", :id

Hi, When upgrading to rspec/rspec-rails 1.2.6 gem (from 1.1.12), I''m having a new problem verifying routes that should not exist. This is to support something like this in routes.rb: map.resources :orders do |orders| orders.resources :items, :except => [:index,:show] end I used to use lambda {}.should_raise( routing error ), but it stopped detecting any raised error.

Hi all, The app I am making right now uses restful routing entirely. I want to prevent people from accessing my actions without the proper HTTP verb so I commented out the :controller/:action/:id catch all routes that were used in pre-RESTful Rails apps. Like so: #map.connect '':controller/:action/:id.:format'' #map.connect '':controller/:action/:id''

I''d like to always add a condition to any version of "find" (e.g. Thing.find(), Thing.find_by_name(), Thing.find_by_whatever) so that in addition to whatever conditions are set, an additional condition is set :conditions=>"user_id=#{current_user.id}" I''d like to make sure that a user only sees/edits/creates entries in the database that have the user_id

I am trying to do a simple find through the current_user but get an exception. Either someone spiked my Starbucks coffee and I am screwing up all over the place or there is something wrong. def index @league = current_user.leagues.find(13) end # Error LocalJumpError in Admin/schedule todosController#index no block given If I pass a block to it it works fine, but it is just messy: =====

This should be easy to solve; I''m trying to get an Rspec routing_spec working with a singular nested resource; map.resources :users do |user| user.resource :profile end All the tests in the profile_routing_spec seem to be failing because they can''t match the routes, for example; # The spec describe ProfileController do describe "route generation" do it

Gidday all - I'm a new user to nut. I've got some cheap powerpal UPSs working fairly well. However I also have a new Dynamix UPS-1700D and an old Powercom KIN-1700 something unit that I cannot make work right. The best method I've found is "trial and error" which sounds a bit last-resort. Is there any better way to find out what protocol is used? -- Criggie

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Darby Vicker <darby.vicker at gmail.com> wrote: > On Saturday, December 20, 2014, Darby Vicker <darby.vicker at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I thought about trying centos 7. But in the end that doesn't really >> help me since I'm trying to keep my current centos 6 installation >> working. I don't really have the

I thought about trying centos 7. But in the end that doesn't really help me since I'm trying to keep my current centos 6 installation working. I don't really have the time/energy to reinstall everyting under CentOS 7 right now. I was able to get a 6.6 LiveCD built myself. The liveCD has the same problem - X doesn't work. I can boot the "Basic Video" option from the

Once again, here''s something I haven''t figured out. Apologies if this is too newb-ish, but, how do I spec my routes using RSpec-Rails? In particular, I''ve got a catch-all route that needs to catch a wide variety of URLs: map.document ''*url'', :controller => ''documents'', :action => ''show'' Is there a way to

Hi, In a routed network setup , is it possible to use ProxyARP given the condition that the shorewall external interface and the DMZ interface are in a completely different network . That means the gateway of the External interface and the hosts in ProxyARPed DMZ zones are in different network. eth0 ---in 220.227.X.Y/30 -- shorewall external interface eth1 ---in 220.227.A.B/27 -- shorewall

Hi All, I have restful_authentication with restful_acl installed on my app, now I want to use OpenId with restful_acl,so my question is... does this make any problems for me or not? I haven''t explored the OpenId for ROR yet, and I am going to do that now,but I just wan --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed

Hi, Has anyone had success with the Dynamix 650VA, that uses the USB cable? I can't get megatec_usb to recognize it, I have tried both stable and development versions. Regards Glen Ogilvie