[Python-Dev] Issue #7978, unexpected EINTR-related exceptions

Issue #7978 (http://bugs.python.org/issue7978) describes a bug in SocketServer where a received signal in SocketServer's select() call will raise an uncaught exception due to EINTR. The proposed solution was to wrap SocketServer's select() with something like twisted's untilConcludes function, whic

Re: [Python-Dev] regrtest oddify

2010/4/7 "Martin v. Löwis" : > I have commented out all tests in test_gdb, yet > > http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/all/builders/sparc%20Ubuntu%20trunk/builds/47/steps/test/logs/stdio > > still shows them being run. Can anybody explain that, please? That's because the buildbot only updated to th

[Python-Dev] regrtest oddify

I have commented out all tests in test_gdb, yet http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/all/builders/sparc%20Ubuntu%20trunk/builds/47/steps/test/logs/stdio still shows them being run. Can anybody explain that, please? TIA, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list

[Python-Dev] iso-2022 and issue 7472: question for the experts

R. David Murray writes: > A long time ago (in a galaxy far far...no, wrong show) > > Er, as I was saying, a long time ago Barry applied a patch to > email that went more or less like this: > > ndex: email/Encoders.py > === >

Re: [Python-Dev] [python-committers] stabilizing for a release

On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 12:54:51 +0100, Michael Foord wrote: >On 07/04/2010 11:30, anatoly techtonik wrote: >> There is still a serious regression in zipfile module: >> http://bugs.python.org/issue6090 >> >> And I would really like to see my issue with difflib tabs committed: =/ >> http://bugs.python

Re: [Python-Dev] Proposing PEP 376

At 12:51 PM 4/7/2010 -0500, Ian Bicking wrote: On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 12:45 PM, P.J. Eby <p...@telecommunity.com> wrote: Examples under debian:   docutils/__init__.py      ->   located in /usr/local/lib/python2.6/site-packages/   ../../../bin/rs

Re: [Python-Dev] Proposing PEP 376

On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 12:45 PM, P.J. Eby wrote: > Examples under debian: >> >>docutils/__init__.py -> located in >> /usr/local/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ >>../../../bin/rst2html.py -> located in /usr/local/bin >>/etc/whatever -> located in

Re: [Python-Dev] Proposing PEP 376

At 11:33 AM 4/7/2010 -0500, Ian Bicking wrote: On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Tarek Ziadé <ziade.ta...@gmail.com> wrote: so for the PEP : - sys.prefix -> the installation prefix provided by --prefix at installation time - site-packages -> the installation libdir,

Re: [Python-Dev] Proposing PEP 376

At 04:40 PM 4/7/2010 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 4:35 PM, P.J. Eby wrote: > At 04:01 PM 4/7/2010 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: >> >> 2010/4/2 P.J. Eby : >> [...] >> > >> > * Paths under the base installation location are relative to the base >> > * Paths not under the base insta

Re: [Python-Dev] Proposing PEP 376

At 12:48 AM 4/4/2010 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: The implementation so far will load zip files founded in the paths, see ZippedDistributionDir/ZippedDistribution. I was saying that it doesn't support sys.path entries of the form: "some/path/to/somezipfile.zip/subdir1" Python works correctly f

Re: [Python-Dev] Proposing PEP 376

On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote: > so for the PEP : > > - sys.prefix -> the installation prefix provided by --prefix at > installation time > - site-packages -> the installation libdir, provided by --install-lib > at installation time How do you actually calculate site-package

Re: [Python-Dev] ffi junk messages

> (also, as I understand it, the latest ctypes issues seem to have popped up > after > an update of the bundled libffi, so perhaps that update wasn't totally right, > didn't choose the right libffi version, or missed some files?) In the case of the SPARC issue: the bug is still exists in the libf

[Python-Dev] Episode 11 of A Little Bit of Python

Hello all, Not *strictly* on topic, but probably of interest nonetheless (so my apologies). Episode 11 of "A Little Bit of Python" is now available. An interview with core-CPython developer Antoine Pitrou. http://advocacy.python.org/podcasts/littlebit/2010-04-07.mp3 Many thanks to Antoine

Re: [Python-Dev] ffi junk messages

Martin v. Löwis v.loewis.de> writes: > > >> Instead of submitting a bug report, it would be better to submit a > > > > In *addition* to submitted a bug report, surely. :) > > I'm not so sure. It's a ctypes/libffi bug, so most likely, nobody will > be able to fix it when reported. It's probably

Re: [Python-Dev] Proposing PEP 376

On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 4:35 PM, P.J. Eby wrote: > At 04:01 PM 4/7/2010 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: >> >> 2010/4/2 P.J. Eby : >> [...] >> > >> > * Paths under the base installation location are relative to the base >> > * Paths not under the base installation location, but under the >> > installation

Re: [Python-Dev] Proposing PEP 376

At 04:01 PM 4/7/2010 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: 2010/4/2 P.J. Eby : [...] > > * Paths under the base installation location are relative to the base > * Paths not under the base installation location, but under the installation > prefix, are also stored relative to the base, IF the base location

Re: [Python-Dev] ffi junk messages

-On [20100407 16:17], "Martin v. Löwis" (mar...@v.loewis.de) wrote: >I'm not so sure. It's a ctypes/libffi bug, so most likely, nobody will >be able to fix it when reported. For platform-specific libffi bugs, the >patch most likely will come from the submitter, as nobo

Re: [Python-Dev] ffi junk messages

>> Instead of submitting a bug report, it would be better to submit a > > In *addition* to submitted a bug report, surely. :) I'm not so sure. It's a ctypes/libffi bug, so most likely, nobody will be able to fix it when reported. For platform-specific libffi bugs, the patch most likely will come

Re: [Python-Dev] ffi junk messages

On 01:29 pm, mar...@v.loewis.de wrote: Mark Dickinson wrote: On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote: Before I file a bug report, is anyone else seeing this (in my case on FreeBSD 8): Modules/_ctypes/libffi/src/x86/sysv.S:360: Error: junk at end of line, first unr

Re: [Python-Dev] Proposing PEP 376

2010/4/2 P.J. Eby : [...] > > * Paths under the base installation location are relative to the base > * Paths not under the base installation location, but under the installation > prefix, are also stored relative to the base, IF the base location is a > subpath of the installation prefix > * All o

Re: [Python-Dev] ffi junk messages

-On [20100407 15:29], "Martin v. Löwis" (mar...@v.loewis.de) wrote: >Instead of submitting a bug report, it would be better to submit a >patch, though. Can you try having the build process use freebsd.S >instead of sysv.S? Mark and me are looking at it right now. I can c

Re: [Python-Dev] ffi junk messages

Mark Dickinson wrote: > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven > wrote: >> Before I file a bug report, is anyone else seeing this (in my case on >> FreeBSD 8): >> >> Modules/_ctypes/libffi/src/x86/sysv.S:360: Error: junk at end of line, first >> unrecognized character is `@

Re: [Python-Dev] ffi junk messages

On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote: > Before I file a bug report, is anyone else seeing this (in my case on > FreeBSD 8): > > Modules/_ctypes/libffi/src/x86/sysv.S:360: Error: junk at end of line, first > unrecognized character is `@' > Modules/_ctypes/libffi/src/

[Python-Dev] ffi junk messages

Before I file a bug report, is anyone else seeing this (in my case on FreeBSD 8): Modules/_ctypes/libffi/src/x86/sysv.S:360: Error: junk at end of line, first unrecognized character is `@' Modules/_ctypes/libffi/src/x86/sysv.S:387: Error: junk at end of line, first unrecognized character is `@'

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing for a release

anatoly techtonik wrote: > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 2:10 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: >>> There is still a serious regression in zipfile module: >>> http://bugs.python.org/issue6090 >>> >>> And I would really like to see my issue with difflib tabs committed: =/ >>> http://bugs.python.org/issue7585 >

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing for a release

On 07/04/2010 11:30, anatoly techtonik wrote: There is still a serious regression in zipfile module: http://bugs.python.org/issue6090 And I would really like to see my issue with difflib tabs committed: =/ http://bugs.python.org/issue7585 The zipfile issue looks like it could be fixed for b

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing for a release

On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 2:10 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > >> There is still a serious regression in zipfile module: >> http://bugs.python.org/issue6090 >> >> And I would really like to see my issue with difflib tabs committed: =/ >> http://bugs.python.org/issue7585 > > None of these are buildbot

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing for a release

anatoly techtonik wrote: > There is still a serious regression in zipfile module: > http://bugs.python.org/issue6090 > > And I would really like to see my issue with difflib tabs committed: =/ > http://bugs.python.org/issue7585 None of these are buildbot failures, so they can't go into 2.7b1, by t

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing for a release

There is still a serious regression in zipfile module: http://bugs.python.org/issue6090 And I would really like to see my issue with difflib tabs committed: =/ http://bugs.python.org/issue7585 -- anatoly t. On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 4:09 AM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > Let's do it. Please no com