Am 30.12.2010 16:40, schrieb Antoine Pitrou: > On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 16:04:16 +0100 > Łukasz Langa <luk...@langa.pl> wrote: >> >> Some answers Philip gave already. Knowing all these things would let us >> decide whether switching the module off on systems that don't meet the >> requirements is okay and can we get away with just documenting how to make >> it work. > > I really don't think it is our job to maintain a list of OS/versions > which work and don't work.
Of course not. I would propose a dynamic test: check how many POSIX semaphores the installation supports, and fail if it's less than 200 (say). >> ISTM concurrent.futures was included a bit too early in the distribution. >> The module has problems not only on BSD [1]. > > I'm not sure concurrent.futures is the culprit, rather than > multiprocessing itself (or perhaps even some core Python functionality). > Actually, the threading-based part of concurrent.futures probably works > fine. Well, "the culprit" really is FreeBSD. However, concurrent.futures apparently makes freehanded use of semaphores, in a way that the FreeBSD authors didn't expect them to be used (if they expected them to be used at all, that is). Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
