MINIFICPP-2668 Move standard processor tests to modular docker tests

[lordgamez]

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MINIFICPP-2668

Depends on #2059

---

Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi - MiNiFi C++.

In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
to ensure the following steps have been taken:

For all changes:

• Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced
  in the commit message?

• Does your PR title start with MINIFICPP-XXXX where XXXX is the JIRA number you are trying to resolve? Pay particular attention to the hyphen "-" character.

• Has your PR been rebased against the latest commit within the target branch (typically main)?

• Is your initial contribution a single, squashed commit?

For code changes:

• If adding new dependencies to the code, are these dependencies licensed in a way that is compatible for inclusion under ASF 2.0?
• If applicable, have you updated the LICENSE file?
• If applicable, have you updated the NOTICE file?

For documentation related changes:

• Have you ensured that format looks appropriate for the output in which it is rendered?

Note:

Please ensure that once the PR is submitted, you check GitHub Actions CI results for build issues and submit an update to your PR as soon as possible.

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

This PR migrates standard processor tests from the legacy docker integration test framework to the newer modular behave-based test framework. The changes consolidate testing infrastructure by removing duplicate processor implementations and container classes from the old framework.

Key changes:

• Adds new container implementations (TcpClientContainer, DiagSlave) to the modular test framework
• Updates 8 feature files to use the new framework's syntax and step definitions
• Removes deprecated processor and container classes from the old docker integration framework
• Extends the behave framework with new step definitions and helper methods

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 26 out of 26 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
tcp_client_container.py	New TCP client container for network listener tests
diag_slave_container.py	New DiagSlave container for Modbus testing
steps.py	Adds step definitions for PLC/Modbus and TCP client setup
*.feature files (8 files)	Migrated to new framework syntax with updated assertions
environment.py	Adds platform detection for x86/x64-only tests
core_steps.py	New steps for file creation and FIPS mode
checking_steps.py	New assertion steps for JSON and empty file validation
container.py	Enhanced with JSON validation and debug print statement
minifi_container.py	Adds FIPS mode support
Old framework files	Removes deprecated processor/container implementations

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)

extensions/standard-processors/tests/features/defragtextflowfiles.feature:42

• The expected output appears to have changed from having one '<1>,' to two '<1>,<1>,' at the beginning. This change affects multiple test scenarios (lines 42 and 69). Ensure this change reflects the actual expected behavior and that corresponding tests verify this is correct, as this could indicate a change in how the DefragmentText processor handles end-of-message patterns.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[szaszm]

What changed here?

[lordgamez]

I wasn't sure either what changed here, but when I checked this should have been the right result, so maybe the checker function was wrong previously.

[szaszm]

It would be nice to add a few negative tests if possible, and that should also validate that the test framework doesn't just accept any input or output.

[lordgamez]

I'm not sure adding additional tests just to test the test framework is a good way to go. Especially in system tests where setting up an environment is time and resource heavy. Maybe some unit tests could be added to some more complex test utilities.
In this case my guess is that the previous framework was checking if a specific output is present in the output file (e.g. "output" in file_content) and because the expected output was a substring of the actual output, the test case succeeded. Now we are checking for an exact match and that's why the check with the original expectation failed.

[szaszm]

Negative tests are a good practice anyway, to see that the code fails when it's supposed to fail, and a partial validation of the test framework is just a happy side effect. But if it's too cumbersome to write, I'm not gonna insist.

[lordgamez]

That's true, I think I was misunderstanding your intention in the previous comment. We could add some negative tests in the future, although I would check what particular negative tests with error/invalid scenarios are already tested on unit test level and only have additional tests for scenarios here which are not possible/viable on unit test level, otherwise only add maybe 1 or 2 for system level validation if needed. But I think re-evaluating the DefragmentText processor test scenarios and extending its test suites is out of scope for this PR.

[szaszm]

is wrapping in sh -c necessary? I suspect it's not, because the command is given as a single string, meaning it has to go through a command line interpreter before being executed.

Suggested change

	cmd = (
	"/bin/sh -c 'apk add netcat-openbsd && "
	"echo TCP client container started; "
	"while true; do echo test_tcp_message | "
	f"nc minifi-primary-{test_context.scenario_id} 10254; "
	"sleep 1; done'"
	)
	cmd = (
	"apk add netcat-openbsd && "
	"echo TCP client container started; "
	"while true; do"
	f" echo test_tcp_message | nc minifi-primary-'{test_context.scenario_id}' 10254; "
	" sleep 1;"
	"done"
	)

[lordgamez]

Unfortunately it fails without it, it is needed when passing a chained command otherwise the apk would try to interpret each parameter after apk add as a separate package to be installed.