Sean Reifschneider added the comment: It seems like the problem here is that chown is defined to take -1 for the arguments, where the underlying platform may define chown taking unsigned uid/gid.
I think in the short term we will need to apply a patch like one of the ones included here, but in the long term maybe something like "chown(path, uid = None, gid = None)"? With "chown(path, gid = 69)". Does it make sense to use None instead of -1 in the long term? ---------- keywords: +64bit, patch nosy: +jafo type: -> behavior _____________________________________ Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://bugs.python.org/issue1747858> _____________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
