Sudden Error Popping up During Sonar Analysis in github actions

SonarQube Cloud
1
  • ALM used (GitHub)
  • CI system used (Github Actions)
  • Scanner command used when applicable (sonarsource/sonarqube-scan-action@master)
  • Languages of the repository - JavaScript/Typescript
  • Error observed -
    ‘’‘ERROR Caused by: Line 3 of report refers to a file which is not configured as a test file: /home/runner/work/repo-name/app_dir/apps/app_name/src/app/resolver/app.resolver.spec.ts’‘’
  • Steps to reproduce - Using this action (sonarsource/sonarqube-scan-action@master)
  • Potential workaround -
    Using - sonarsource/sonarqube-scan-action@v3
2

Note Here - No test files or sonar configs were updated.
Just after the Sonar update this error is popping up across multiple repos.
But using an older version is running fine.

4

Hey there.

Take a look at this post:

While it’s related to Python, I think the issue might have the same cause. Are you doing some processing of the coverage report that could affect the file paths?

5

Hi Colin ,
Thanks for getting back here so quickly.
For one of the repos we are not , it is as is.

- name: Unit Tests
        run: yarn test --coverage

      - name: Run sonarqube analysis
        uses: sonarsource/sonarqube-scan-action@master
        env:
          SONAR_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.SONAR_TOKEN }}
          SONAR_HOST_URL: ${{ secrets.SONAR_HOST_URL }}
        with:
          args: >
            -Dsonar.projectVersion=${{ github.sha }}

But for another repo it goes something like

      # Setup our coverage directory and files for SonarQube reporting
      - name: Setup Files
        run: |
          mkdir ./coverage
          touch ./coverage/.gitkeep
          echo '<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><testExecutions version="1"></testExecutions>' > ./test-report.xml

Yes we face a similar issue

6

Let me give you the whole piece for the 2nd repo here

# Setup our coverage directory and files for SonarQube reporting
      - name: Setup Files
        run: |
          mkdir ./coverage
          touch ./coverage/.gitkeep
          echo '<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><testExecutions version="1"></testExecutions>' > ./test-report.xml

      # Run our tests
      - name: ${{ matrix.data.type }} Test
        uses: mansagroup/nrwl-nx-action@v3
        with:
          targets: ${{ matrix.data.target }}
          all: ${{ needs.context.outputs.nx-run-all }}
          parallel: true
          args: --codeCoverage

      # Upload coverage report as an artifact
      - uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4
        with:
          name: test-results-${{ matrix.data.target }}
          path: |
            ./coverage
            ./test-report.xml

  sonarqube:
    name: Run SonarQube
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    needs: [context, test]
    steps:
      - name: Checkout Source Files
        uses: actions/checkout@v2
        with:
          fetch-depth: 0

      # Here we download our individual coverage reports
      # That we previously uploaded as artifacts
      - uses: actions/download-artifact@v4
        if: needs.context.outputs.sonarqube == 'true'
        with:
          name: test-results-unit
          path: ./coverage-unit

      - uses: actions/download-artifact@v4
        if: needs.context.outputs.sonarqube == 'true'
        with:
          name: test-results-integration
          path: ./coverage-integration

      # In the project's sonar-project.properties file, it's
      # Configured to point at the ./coverage-unit and the
      # ./coverage-integration paths for coverage files and it
      # Uses those to stitch together a total coverage report
      - name: Run SonarQube
        uses: sonarsource/sonarqube-scan-action@v3.1.0
        if: needs.context.outputs.sonarqube == 'true'
        env:
          SONAR_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.SONAR_TOKEN }}
          SONAR_HOST_URL: ${{ secrets.SONAR_HOST_URL }}
        with:
          args: >
            -Dsonar.projectVersion=${{ github.sha }}
7

Let me suggest you build a small sample repository where you face this issue and make it a public GitHub repo so that it’s easy to reproduce on our end and suggest the best fix.

8

Creating a sample repo might not be possibile :confused: .
Is there any more information I can give you here to better understand this ?

9

In any efficient manner, probably not. It’s important that we’re able to reproduce the issue under the same conditions. Having a reproducer is a pretty reasonable ask, especially if we need to call in the help of our dev teams.

It doesn’t have to be “real” code, but any sample project/pipeline that can reproduce the issue will do. :slight_smile: