Re: [Python-Dev] Using Python on a fork-less POSIX-like OS
On 7/30/2018 4:26 AM, Barath Aron wrote: On 07/30/2018 10:23 AM, Victor Stinner wrote: Python 3.8 will support os.posix_spawn(). I would like to see it used whenever possible instead of fork+exec, since it's faster and it can be safer on some platforms. Pablo Salgado is your guy for that. Victor Awesome! Will this backported to 2.7? Or people should forget 2.7? Normally, enhancements are not backported anywhere. New API == new version of Python. You can, and people and organizations do, compile your own customized version. Official (pydev) bugfixes for 2.7 end 1 Jan 2020. Many projects have already stopped or will stop before then fixing 2.7 versions of their packages. But some people will probably use it for at least another decade. Do what is best for you. -- Terry Jan Reedy ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] Using Python on a fork-less POSIX-like OS
Supporting a new platform requires a lot work. It would be more reasonable for you to first try to get a good support of the master branch before start thinking how to support Python versions. Python 2.7 in 2018? Really? Tick tock: https://pythonclock.org/ http://python3statement.org/ Usually, we don't support new platforms in CPython without strong support of a core developer. See the PEP 11 for more conditions like buildbot requirement. I suggest you to start working on a fork of CPython and maintain your changes in a branch. Git rebase makes it easy. Victor Le lundi 30 juillet 2018, Barath Aron a écrit : > On 07/30/2018 10:23 AM, Victor Stinner wrote: >> >> Python 3.8 will support os.posix_spawn(). I would like to see it used whenever possible instead of fork+exec, since it's faster and it can be safer on some platforms. Pablo Salgado is your guy for that. >> >> Victor > > Awesome! Will this backported to 2.7? Or people should forget 2.7? > > Aron > > ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] Using Python on a fork-less POSIX-like OS
On 07/30/2018 10:23 AM, Victor Stinner wrote: Python 3.8 will support os.posix_spawn(). I would like to see it used whenever possible instead of fork+exec, since it's faster and it can be safer on some platforms. Pablo Salgado is your guy for that. Victor Awesome! Will this backported to 2.7? Or people should forget 2.7? Aron ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] Using Python on a fork-less POSIX-like OS
Python 3.8 will support os.posix_spawn(). I would like to see it used whenever possible instead of fork+exec, since it's faster and it can be safer on some platforms. Pablo Salgado is your guy for that. Victor ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] Using Python on a fork-less POSIX-like OS
On 07/29/2018 06:02 PM, Berker Peksağ wrote: There is an open issue to add os.posix_spawn() at https://bugs.python.org/issue20104 Seems promising, but 3.7 does not support it. And I don't see whether Python will work without fork(). - bpo-20104: Expose posix_spawn as a low level API in the os module. (removed before 3.7.0rc1) --Berker Aron ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] Using Python on a fork-less POSIX-like OS
On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 5:44 PM, Barath Aron wrote: > My question is that the _posixsubprocess.c can be prepared to use > posix_spawn(3) instead of fork(2)? Maybe the UNIX/Linux version can also > benefit from it, see: > https://salsa.debian.org/ruby-team/ruby-posix-spawn There is an open issue to add os.posix_spawn() at https://bugs.python.org/issue20104 --Berker ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Python-Dev] Using Python on a fork-less POSIX-like OS
Hello Python list, I intend to cross-compile Python v3.6.6 to Threos ( https://threos.io ) operating system. Threos is supports a quite large set from POSIX and C89/C99. Unfortunately, Threos lacks fork(2), but provides posix_spawn(3) instead. I already made some local changes in posixmodule.c to compile due to some features are detected as present but actually not supported, like HAVE_FORK -- I blame autotools for this :-). I don't know, however, whether the Python shall cross-compile without issues. My question is that the _posixsubprocess.c can be prepared to use posix_spawn(3) instead of fork(2)? Maybe the UNIX/Linux version can also benefit from it, see: https://salsa.debian.org/ruby-team/ruby-posix-spawn Best regards, Aron ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
