New resource: azurerm_storage_account_local_user

[magodo]

Fix #19536.

Test Result

terraform-provider-azurerm on  storage_account_local_user via 🐹 v1.19 took 3m30s
💢  TF_ACC=1 go test -v -timeout=20h ./internal/services/storage -run=TestAccLocalUser_
=== RUN   TestAccLocalUser_passwordOnly
=== PAUSE TestAccLocalUser_passwordOnly
=== RUN   TestAccLocalUser_sshKeyOnly
=== PAUSE TestAccLocalUser_sshKeyOnly
=== RUN   TestAccLocalUser_passwordAndSSHKey
=== PAUSE TestAccLocalUser_passwordAndSSHKey
=== RUN   TestAccLocalUser_homeDirectory
=== PAUSE TestAccLocalUser_homeDirectory
=== RUN   TestAccLocalUser_permissionScope
=== PAUSE TestAccLocalUser_permissionScope
=== RUN   TestAccLocalUser_requiresImport
=== PAUSE TestAccLocalUser_requiresImport
=== CONT  TestAccLocalUser_passwordOnly
=== CONT  TestAccLocalUser_homeDirectory
=== CONT  TestAccLocalUser_requiresImport
=== CONT  TestAccLocalUser_passwordAndSSHKey
=== CONT  TestAccLocalUser_permissionScope
=== CONT  TestAccLocalUser_sshKeyOnly
--- PASS: TestAccLocalUser_sshKeyOnly (135.64s)
--- PASS: TestAccLocalUser_passwordOnly (152.07s)
--- PASS: TestAccLocalUser_requiresImport (158.62s)
--- PASS: TestAccLocalUser_passwordAndSSHKey (177.60s)
--- PASS: TestAccLocalUser_homeDirectory (179.96s)
--- PASS: TestAccLocalUser_permissionScope (206.08s)
PASS

[tombuildsstuff]

hey @magodo

Thanks for this PR - I've taken a look through and left some comments inline but this is off to a good start, if we can fix those up then we should be able to take another look 👍

Thanks!

[katbyte]

Thanks @magodo - LGTM 👤

[katbyte]

@magodo could we fix the linting here? once thats done this should be good to merge

stale

[dhensby]

I'm super keen to see this taken in 🎉

[dhensby]

Suggested change

	key = local.second_public_key
	key = local.first_public_key

Should this be first_public_key?

[magodo]

This doesn't make a difference?

[dhensby]

Sure - but it's a bit confusing when reading the docs to see second_public_key and not first_public_key anywhere, it makes you think you've missed something.

What's the reasonable real world case where you'd add the same authorized key twice to the same storage account?

[magodo]

Sorry, you are right! That is a mistake in my test. I intend to test multiple ssh key in this case:

terraform-provider-azurerm/internal/services/storage/storage_account_local_user_resource_test.go

Lines 214 to 234 in 779cf9d

	func (r LocalUserResource) passwordAndSSHKeyMoreAuthKeys(data acceptance.TestData) string {
	template := r.template(data)
	return fmt.Sprintf(`
	%s
	resource "azurerm_storage_account_local_user" "test" {
	name = "user"
	storage_account_id = azurerm_storage_account.test.id
	ssh_key_enabled = true
	ssh_password_enabled = true
	ssh_authorized_key {
	description = "key1"
	key = local.first_public_key
	}
	ssh_authorized_key {
	description = "key2"
	key = local.second_public_key
	}
	}
	`, template)
	}

[dhensby]

Cool; updating the docs examples to use both (or just one) would help reduce confusion too :)

[drjwelch]

Will be using this as soon as released - thanks for contributing it. 👍

[katbyte]

LGTM ☘️

[github-actions]

This functionality has been released in v3.39.0 of the Terraform Provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading.

For further feature requests or bug reports with this functionality, please create a new GitHub issue following the template. Thank you!

[dhensby]

Suggested change

	resource_name = azurerm_storage_container.example.name
	resource_name = "example-container"

resource azurerm_storage_container doesn't have an attribute "name", so this needs to be updated.

[magodo]

This one? https://registry.terraform.io/providers/hashicorp/azurerm/latest/docs/resources/storage_container#name

[dhensby]

Yes, that is an argument (input), not an attribute (output)

[github-actions]

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active contributions.
If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.