nspcc-dev/neofs-dev-env

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/nspcc-dev/neofs-dev-env.git synced 2026-03-01 04:29:00 +00:00

`make down/basic` does not stop morph #54

New issue

Open

opened 2025-12-28 18:08:15 +00:00 by sami · 5 comments

sami commented

2025-12-28 18:08:15 +00:00

Owner

Originally created by @carpawell on GitHub (Oct 3, 2022).

After #212 there is a new target in the Makefile: (up|down)/bootstrap. It has been added to every up/* but not to all the down/* targets.
As a result down/basic does not return a state after the up/basic. It confused me a little and was not expected of me: every local run was made using the same morph state without any cleaning. Not sure if it is something that we want to have in our makefile. Mb it is a kinda feature and allows caching morph b/w runs.

Originally created by @carpawell on GitHub (Oct 3, 2022). After #212 there is a new target in the `Makefile`: `(up|down)/bootstrap`. It has been added to every `up/*` but not to all the `down/*` targets. As a result `down/basic` does not return a state after the `up/basic`. It confused me a little and was not expected of me: every local run was made using the same morph state without any cleaning. Not sure if it is something that we want to have in our makefile. Mb it is a kinda feature and allows caching morph b/w runs.

sami added the

discussion

labels

2025-12-28 18:08:15 +00:00

sami commented

2025-12-28 18:08:16 +00:00

Author

Owner

@cthulhu-rider commented on GitHub (Dec 20, 2023):

i find current behavior correct:

make down/basic stops services listed in .basic_services and no others
if make up/bootstrap was done 1st, then make up/basic, i don't expected make down/basic to stop the bootstrap services that were run 1st

P.S. after #282 ir (ex. morph_chain) keeps the NeoFS chain between starts intentionally

wanna stop all services, do make down
wanna reset collected state, do make clean
and if u don't, this does not happen

@cthulhu-rider commented on GitHub (Dec 20, 2023): i find current behavior correct: 1. `make down/basic` stops services listed in `.basic_services` and no others 2. if `make up/bootstrap` was done 1st, then `make up/basic`, i don't expected `make down/basic` to stop the bootstrap services that were run 1st P.S. after #282 `ir` (ex. `morph_chain`) keeps the NeoFS chain between starts intentionally - wanna stop all services, do `make down` - wanna reset collected state, do `make clean` - and if u don't, this does not happen

sami commented

2025-12-28 18:08:16 +00:00

Author

Owner

@carpawell commented on GitHub (Dec 20, 2023):

@cthulhu-rider, dont you think this scenario should be correct:

i have nothing
i do make up/basic
i do make down/basic
i have nothing again?

Why are they named the opposite way then if down does not neutralize up? Isnt morph basic too?

make down/basic stops services listed in .basic_services and no others

Agree, but files/services grouping is kinda of an internal thing. What can make up/bootstrap be useful for? Running neo-go in the neofs-devenv repo?
I think we can reconsider devenv (and this issue) soon after it is not used in the integrational tests (mb that will also mean #212 rollback).

@carpawell commented on GitHub (Dec 20, 2023): @cthulhu-rider, dont you think this scenario should be correct: 1. i have nothing 2. i do `make up/basic` 3. i do `make down/basic` 4. i have nothing again? Why are they named the opposite way then if `down` does not neutralize `up`? Isnt `morph` basic too? > make down/basic stops services listed in .basic_services and no others Agree, but files/services grouping is kinda of an internal thing. What can `make up/bootstrap` be useful for? Running `neo-go` in the `neofs-devenv` repo? I think we can reconsider devenv (and this issue) soon after it is not used in the integrational tests (mb that will also mean #212 rollback).

sami commented

2025-12-28 18:08:16 +00:00

Author

Owner

@roman-khimov commented on GitHub (Dec 20, 2023):

Might become irrelevant after #282.

@roman-khimov commented on GitHub (Dec 20, 2023): Might become irrelevant after #282.

sami commented

2025-12-28 18:08:16 +00:00

Author

Owner

@cthulhu-rider commented on GitHub (Dec 21, 2023):

@carpawell if paraphrase the original issue text to lets embed "bootstrap" services into the "basic" ones and purge "bootstrap" as a separate component - im only 👍

@cthulhu-rider commented on GitHub (Dec 21, 2023): @carpawell if paraphrase the original issue text to `lets embed "bootstrap" services into the "basic" ones and purge "bootstrap" as a separate component` - im only :+1:

sami commented

2025-12-28 18:08:16 +00:00

Author

Owner

@carpawell commented on GitHub (Dec 21, 2023):

lets embed "bootstrap" services into the "basic" ones and purge "bootstrap" as a separate component

Yes, i think it is the closest one to what i would implement.

@carpawell commented on GitHub (Dec 21, 2023): > lets embed "bootstrap" services into the "basic" ones and purge "bootstrap" as a separate component Yes, i think it is the closest one to what i would implement.