Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

RTS table file load "failure" event at startup misnomer causes build run workflow failure #25

Closed
3 tasks done
skliper opened this issue May 6, 2022 · 0 comments · Fixed by #27
Closed
3 tasks done

Comments

@skliper
Copy link
Contributor

skliper commented May 6, 2022

Checklist (Please check before submitting)

  • I reviewed the Contributing Guide.
  • I reviewed the README file to see if the feature is in the major future work.
  • I performed a cursory search to see if the feature request is relevant, not redundant, nor in conflict with other tickets.

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
The build and run workflow checks for err|warn|fail, but SC nominally sends the following event:
EVS Port1 66/1/SC 21: RTS table file load failure count = 62

See error here: https://github.com/nasa/SC/runs/6327781812?check_suite_focus=true

Describe the solution you'd like
Really this isn't a failure. It's just than only 2 of up to 64 RTS tables were loaded automatically. Maybe just change to say 'RTS table files not loaded automatically at startup = 62' or similar.

Describe alternatives you've considered
Could set the configuration just to load the 2 existing RTS's... but it may be handy to leave as somewhat larger to avoid requiring recompile to add more default RTS's.

Additional context
None

Requester Info
Jacob Hageman - NASA/GSFC

@skliper skliper added this to the Draco milestone May 6, 2022
astrogeco added a commit that referenced this issue May 11, 2022
…text

Fix #25, RTS not loaded event no longer implies failure in text
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant