On 17 May 2013 08:37, "Guido van Rossum" <gu...@python.org> wrote: > > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Greg Ewing <greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz> wrote: > > Guido van Rossum wrote: > >> > >> This reminds me of the following bug, which can happen when two > >> processes are both writing the .pyc file and a third is reading it. > >> ... I think all the errors are > >> > >> actually explainable from this scenario. > > > > > > The second writer will still carry on to write a valid > > .pyc file, though, won't it? So this wouldn't result in > > a permanently broken .pyc file being left behind, which > > is what the original problem description seemed say > > was happening. > > From the evidence that is not completely clear to me. > > Thomas Wouters' scenario with two different Python versions writing > the same .pyc file could cause that; I don't know if Barry has ruled > that possibility out yet.
3.2 uses __pycache__, so it should only potentially conflict within the same version. I haven't heard any rumblings about anything like this in Fedora or RHEL, so my suspicions still lean towards a Debian or Ubuntu specific background service somehow managing to interfere. However, I'll ask explicitly on the Fedora Python list to see if anyone has encountered anything similar. Cheers, Nick. > > -- > --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) > _______________________________________________ > 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/ncoghlan%40gmail.com
_______________________________________________ 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