If they're really all wontfix, maybe we should mark them as wontfix,
thus giving 3.4 a sendoff worthy of its heroic stature.
Godspeed, and may a flight of angels sing thee to thy rest,
//arry/
On 08/20/2018 05:52 AM, Victor Stinner wrote:
> "shutil copy* unsafe on POSIX - they preserve set
On 20.8.2018 20:02, Jun Aruga wrote:
Dear Python sig.
Someone can you help to promote for the upstream Python project to use
gcc-8 on the Travis CI test?
Right now the project has 4 test cases [1] including defaut gcc
version 4.8 cases on Travis CI.
However technically it is possible to use gcc
Chances are, Andrew click the unsubscribe link from an email reply that
Abdur-Rahmaan made (this happens to me semi-regularly).
On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 at 09:34 Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer
wrote:
> no idea, a mail popped up in my inbox ...
>
>
> Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer
> https://github.com/Abdur-rahma
20.08.18 18:18, Paul Moore пише:
I expect that PR suggesting some improvements to the documentation
would be very welcome - in particular, the section would almost
certainly benefit from some examples. If that's something you'd feel
comfortable doing, that would be great.
There is an open docum
I apologize, that's my IP, and i was trying to remove myself from the list.
How that request got associated with you, I haven't the foggiest. I
certainly was not intended.
Andrew Hettinger
http://Prominic.NET | Skype: AndrewProminic
Tel: 866.339.3169 (toll free) -or- 1.217.356.2888 x. 110 (int'l
no idea, a mail popped up in my inbox ...
Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer
https://github.com/Abdur-rahmaanJ
Mauritius
>
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/
On 20/08/2018 14:52, Victor Stinner wrote:
>> "shutil copy* unsafe on POSIX - they preserve setuid/setgit bits"
>> https://bugs.python.org/issue17180
> There is no fix. A fix may break the backward compatibility. Is it really
> worth it for the last 3.4 release?
>
My idea would be to focus on a "fi
On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 at 15:58, Zhao Lee wrote:
>
> The current behavior of shutil.make_archive caused many issues , the problem
> is mainly on the extracted archive directory hierarchy. These are the proofs:
>
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/51914467/directory-hierarchy-issue-when-using-shut
The current behavior of shutil.make_archive caused many issues , the problem is
mainly on the extracted archive directory hierarchy. These are the proofs:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/51914467/directory-hierarchy-issue-when-using-shutil-make-archive
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/326
ah yes, that's it. thank you !
Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer
https://github.com/Abdur-rahmaanJ
Mauritius
On Mon, 20 Aug 2018, 17:41 Ryan Gonzalez, wrote:
> I think you generally want to sent this to the list administrators
> directly, but FWIW this has happened to me before. If it doesn't come up
>
I think you generally want to sent this to the list administrators
directly, but FWIW this has happened to me before. If it doesn't come up
again, you can probably ignore it.
On Mon, Aug 20, 2018, 1:43 AM Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer
wrote:
> just notifying that 199.103.2.101
> was trying to remove
> "shutil copy* unsafe on POSIX - they preserve setuid/setgit bits"
> https://bugs.python.org/issue17180
There is no fix. A fix may break the backward compatibility. Is it really
worth it for the last 3.4 release?
> "XML vulnerabilities in Python"
> https://bugs.python.org/issue17239
Bug inactiv
12 matches
Mail list logo
