Before introducing InSpec profiles in https://github.com/chef/inspec/pull/252 we had `metadata.rb` keep all information. This included an undisclosed field called `supports`. However, this field was never actually used in practice. So for legacy profiles, this means that `supports` was ignored. In order to keep old profiles running in exactly the way they were before, ignore this field when reading from metadata.rb
For reading the profiles metadata, we're using the train mock backend
through Inspec::Runner. The new `supports` feature never agrees with the
mock backend.
Now, it we figure out if this is a mock class and then just say that it
supports whatever we're asking for.
Tl;dr: there's probably a more beautiful solution to this.
Added a test case, but it fails -- while the command line interface
works fine.
Package release info (e.g. '19.el7') is often required to determine if
a system has been properly patched.
Lines like the following from rpm are messing up the version returned
by the package resource:
"...\nVersion : 1.8.6p3 Vendor: Red Hat, Inc.\n..."
Correcting this with a new conditional check.
Currently, #readable?, #writeable?, and #executable? will incorrectly
return true if the file does not exist.
In addition, I took the opportunity to refactor the File resource to
make it easier to write unit tests and supplied a full unit test
suite for this resource.
processes('bash').user does not actually make much sense for a resource
that is a list -- different entries can belong to different users.
Analogous for processes('bash').state.
The attributes 'users' and 'states' expose the unique values
corresponding to that property of entries in the process list.
Fixes#295.
before, the resource would throw an exception when include_files
returned nil (i.e., [].flatten!)
added basic unit tests capturing the include_files behaviour
