[tests] Split out cli client tests

[townsend2010]

This is a first step to help organize the client cli tests and make them more manageable.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 84.83%. Comparing base (862f44f) to head (9980d57).
Report is 4603 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2348   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   84.83%   84.83%           
=======================================
  Files         205      205           
  Lines       10216    10216           
=======================================
  Hits         8667     8667           
  Misses       1549     1549           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[Saviq]

This needs a rebase, and a s/2021/2022/ in the headers :)

Noice otherwise :)

[Saviq]

@townsend2010 bump?

[townsend2010]

Due to the changes I made for the authentication stuff, a MockPlatform needs to be defined before
StrictMock<MockDaemonRpc> mock_daemon in ClientTestFixture so the set_server_socket_restrictions() call in theDaemonRpc ctor can be mocked. However, due to how the singleton boiler plate is currently done, this MockPlatform definition cannot be done in a header due to the following error:

In file included from /home/townsend/multipass/multipass/tests/client/test_cli_client.cpp:18:
/home/townsend/multipass/multipass/tests/client/client_test_fixture.h:81:8: error: ‘multipass::test::ClientTestFixture’ has a field ‘multipass::test::ClientTestFixture::platform_attr’ whose type uses the anonymous namespace [-Werror=subobject-linkage]
   81 | struct ClientTestFixture : public Test
      |        ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

One of the main points of this refactoring is to move the MockDaemonRpc object into a class (ClientTestFixture) in a shared header and removing this defeats the purpose of most of this refactoring. Until this issue can be overcome, I think this should wait.

[jibel]

@andrei-toterman to review what this PR is about and close it.

[andrei-toterman]

I don't think these changes are still relevant today. Those changes are splitting a test file into multiple test files, but the current efforts are about splitting out the test executable itself into multiple test executables. While the changes themselves make sense, they are very out of date. So we can still split up a file into multiple files just for easier development, but I think it would be too difficult to build on top of this PR.