[Python-Dev] Re: change of behaviour for '.' in sys.path between 3.10.0a7 and 3.10.0b1
Might be out of context here, but IMHO "." shouldn't be assumed to be the
current directory anyway.
As someone who has ported python to a system where it isn't, these assumptions
tend to cause problems.
Cheers
Chris
Sent from my iPhone
> On 3 Jun 2021, at 09:31, Robin Becker wrote:
>
> I have a failing test case in 3.10.0b1 for code that uses changes to
> sys.path and attempts to load unpackaged modules by changing directory and
> placing '.' into sys.path; the code works as expected in 2.7.18, 3.6-3.10.0a7.
>
> I printed out related variables in the a7 and b1 runs and find that sys.path
> is identical (modulo version name changes) and that os.getcwd() is as
> expected and that os.path.isfile('./%s.py' % modulename) is True.
>
> In a7 exec('%s as m', NS) works, but in b1 I get ModuleNotFoundError.
>
> I can fix the problem by changing
>
>sys.path.insert(0,'.')
>
> into
>
>sys.path.insert(0,os.getcwd())
>
> The behaviour of '.' in sys.path has always been slightly mysterious, but is
> this a real bug and have we just been lucky for 20 years?
>
> I have placed some details here
>
> https://www.reportlab.com/ftp/import-bug-310b1.txt
>
> ReportLab has quite a large codebase and I think it would be hard to get a
> concise test of this behaviour change. I would be glad if this is an expected
> change a7-->b1 and if the use of '.' in this way has become somehow wrong.
>
> I do know that during the tests the errant code is executed with different
> values for the target directory; the first usage seems to succeed.
> --
> Robin Becker
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/DE3MDGB2JGOJ3X4NWEGJS26BK6PJUPKW/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/664GGOGFJZ3SQ7PWLA6BYP4A27TSFZ63/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
[Python-Dev] Re: Python3 OSF/1 support?
As someone who has ported Python 3 to another "less commonly used" system (RISC OS) I just do semi-regular updates rather than trying to keep it it totally up to date with "main". I have some vague recollection of there being talk about a "second tier" of systems where there is at least a maintainer and build bot, but I'm not sure what, it anything, came from that. Cheers Chris On 14/07/2021 15:44, Senthil Kumaran wrote: On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 04:30:33AM +, Jay K wrote: Hi. I have an Alpha/OSF machine up and running. It is little slow, but it works ok. I would like to run Python3 on it. I have it "compiling and working". It was easy enough so far. https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/27063 Admitted, I haven't figured out what is happening with the posixsubprocess module. Yes? No? Maybe? I can possibly provide ongoing "support" (I don't expect it will be much) and a buildbot (if really required), if I can get it working a bit more, if this is approved, etc. I haven't looked It is difficult to maintain support for less commonly used systems. If you maintain it personally (like using a cron) and look at the results over time, you could see the difficulty in maintaining the support. Personally, my vote is a -1 here. In the PR, another core-dev, Ronald had commented that support for explicitly removed a few years ago. ___ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/VSQD4TVVI42I5NMDZ4OE43ZAPJV5M66G/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
