Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing builds

2006-01-28 Thread Martin v. Löwis
Thomas Wouters wrote: > I'd need developer access back to check it in, though. Unless anyone > objects, of course :) I copied ~/thomas/authorized_keys to ~pythondev/keys/thomas.wouters, changed ownership/permissions, and ran make_authorized_keys in the pythondev account. So you should have access

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing builds

2006-01-27 Thread Tim Peters
[Tim] ... > AFAICT, you (twouters) already have it. There's a "Yes" in > the twouters row under the "CVS Access" column on the Python project's > Members admin page. Have you tried checking in? What happens when > you do? ... LOL -- what a bubblehead I am! Whether you can check in has nothing

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing builds

2006-01-27 Thread Tim Peters
I suppose another possibility for why twouters couldn't check in is because someone added him to the project's cvs_acls script. If so, I don't know anything about how to get that changed. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.pytho

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing builds

2006-01-27 Thread Tim Peters
[Thomas] >>> I'd need developer access back to check it in, though. [Tim] >> AFAICT, twouters has developer access to the Python project -- >> although maybe someone else re-enabled that w/o mentioning it here. [Thomas] > I meant svn-checkin-access (it got disabled for disuse a while back.) I kn

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing builds

2006-01-27 Thread Thomas Wouters
On Thu, Jan 26, 2006 at 09:41:53PM -0500, Tim Peters wrote: > [Thomas Wouters] > > ... > > I'd need developer access back to check it in, though. > AFAICT, twouters has developer access to the Python project -- > although maybe someone else re-enabled that w/o mentioning it here. I meant svn-chec

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing builds

2006-01-26 Thread Tim Peters
[Thomas Wouters] > ... > I'd need developer access back to check it in, though. AFAICT, twouters has developer access to the Python project -- although maybe someone else re-enabled that w/o mentioning it here. > Unless anyone objects, of course :) Of course I object! I bow to the group will, t

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing builds

2006-01-26 Thread Thomas Wouters
On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 01:59:18AM +0100, Thomas Wouters wrote: > [ iffy isatty behaviour on Solaris ] Considering that: - the approach for opening pty's, while not the only one, is the preferred way of doing it on Solaris, - the actual pty's seem to be completely functional, - the usual wa

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing builds

2006-01-25 Thread Michael Hudson
"Gregory P. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Using BerkeleyDB 3.2 often segfaults for me; using 3.3 often hangs in > the test suite. Both are so old I don't see much motivation to track > the issues down. My goal is to not have http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/ go red randomly because of e

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing builds

2006-01-24 Thread Thomas Wouters
On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 11:52:52PM +0100, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > > It looks like a timing issue; the first run succeeds, all subsequent runs > > fail, for a while, anyway. I'll do some googling and browsing other > > tty/pty-using code to see if there's anything we're not doing we should be >

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing builds

2006-01-24 Thread Martin v. Löwis
Thomas Wouters wrote: > FWIW, it's brittle on Solaris 9, too, and the SF compilefarm has two of > those. I don't know if it's the same problem, but on Solaris 9, the slave > part of the tty/pty pair sometimes isn't a TTY (according to os.isatty.) The > buildbot's log doesn't list the solaris 10 tes

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing builds

2006-01-24 Thread Gregory P. Smith
On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 11:01:36PM -0800, Neal Norwitz wrote: > rather than later. There are a bunch of tests that are not stable. > It would really help to get people knowledgeable about a particular > subdomain to provide input into bugs/patches and produce patches too! > > The areas that are

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing builds

2006-01-24 Thread Thomas Wouters
On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 11:01:36PM -0800, Neal Norwitz wrote: > * test_pty is brittle on solaris 10, sometimes it works, sometimes not FWIW, it's brittle on Solaris 9, too, and the SF compilefarm has two of those. I don't know if it's the same problem, but on Solaris 9, the slave part of the tty/

Re: [Python-Dev] stabilizing builds

2006-01-23 Thread Thomas Wouters
On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 11:01:36PM -0800, Neal Norwitz wrote: > * test_pty is brittle on solaris 10, sometimes it works, sometimes not Do we have a Solaris 10 box to test on? I think I wrote most of test_pty, and I can see if I can pin down the problem, but I don't have a Solaris 10 box myself.

[Python-Dev] stabilizing builds

2006-01-23 Thread Neal Norwitz
I would really like to stabilize a bunch of the current rough edges in 2.5. We are likely to have enough instability with the PEP 353 changes, so it would be better to fix some of these issues sooner rather than later. There are a bunch of tests that are not stable. It would really help to get p