Martin v. Löwis <mar...@v.loewis.de> added the comment: > "It's a bug in random.c that doesn' t check for signal pending inside the > read(2) code, so you have no chance to kill the process via signals until > the read(2) syscall is finished, and it could take a lot of time before > return, if the buffer given to the read syscall is very big..." > > I've had a quick look at the source code, and indeed, read(2) from > /dev/urandom can now be interrupted by a signal, so looping seems to > be justified.
No: if read(2) is interrupted, no data is returned, and exception is raised. So it won't loop in that case, but raise the exception out of urandom also (which is the right thing to do). ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10824> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
