New submission from Aldona Majorek [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Copy of issue 1579370
Programs using generators, exceptions and threads could crash.
I was not able to make plain python program to crash, but python program
embedded in C++ crashed very reliably.
No more crashes after applying patch from
New submission from André Fritzsche [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
After struggling around with my code for nearly 1 hour now, I found out
that one of my regular expressions with a special string causes python
to hang up - not really hang up, because the processor usage is at
nearly 100%, so I think the
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
This is right, but there won't be any more 2.4 release.
Either apply the patch to your local copy of the sources,
or simply upgrade to 2.5.
--
nosy: +amaury.forgeotdarc
resolution: - out of date
status: open - closed
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
To optimize your query, you could remove '^.*' and '.*$', and replace
match() with search().
Now it returns instantly...
--
nosy: +amaury.forgeotdarc
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
André Fritzsche [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Thank you for this answer.
It solves my problem, but I think that the issues ist still existing -
or not? (The regex is running on - 3 hours now)
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
New submission from Caleb Deveraux [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm not exactly sure if this is a bug or by design. Within the struct
module, whenever you provide a format string containing a repeat count
with no associated format specifier, the count is silently ignored.
eg.
struct.pack(12345)
''
New submission from Robert Schuppenies [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This issue is a branch from issue3098.
Below a summary of the discussion:
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
It seems that in some UCS4 builds, sizeof(Py_UNICODE) could end
up being more than 4 if the native int type is itself larger than 32
Changes by Antoine Pitrou [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
--
nosy: +effbot, lemburg, loewis, pitrou
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3130
___
___
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Are you sure your regexp will return what you want?
The best match for the first part of the alternative is
(14,
D:\projects\retest\ver_700\modules\sapekl\__init__.py, line 21
)
The best match for the second part is
Robert Schuppenies [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I followed Marc's advise and checked-in a corrected test.
Besides, I opened a new issue to address the fallback solution for
UCS4 and UCS2 (see issue3130).
--
resolution: - fixed
status: open - closed
Vinay Sajip [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Fix checked into SVN. Thanks for the patch.
--
resolution: - fixed
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3126
___
André Fritzsche [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Further I was, because the upper listed string wasn't expected for this
code (until it occured the first time ;-) )
Normally there has been only one occurence of (file) (.., line) or
(.., line) (file) per string, so the regex did quite do
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Yes, this can happen.
See http://www.regular-expressions.info/catastrophic.html
I am sure your regexp belongs to the same category.
--
resolution: - invalid
status: open - closed
___
Python
André Fritzsche [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Thanks for the link, it was very interesting to read what can happen in
some circumstances.
I think, the first two chapters can match to the problem.
So the type of this issue should be feature request ;-)
Never the less I learned something
Brad Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:23 AM, Martin v. Löwis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
After reviewing this again, I'm skeptical that this is a good idea. It
doesn't achieve its original purpose
Raymond Hettinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Jeffrey, do you have an interest in taking it from here?
--
assignee: rhettinger - jyasskin
nosy: +jyasskin
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3056
New submission from Haoyu Bai [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
After install Python 3.0 r64319 on my Linux system, running 2to3 given
the below error:
$ 2to3 hello23.py
Traceback (most recent call last):
File /usr/bin/2to3, line 5, in module
sys.exit(refactor.main(lib2to3/fixes))
File
Aristotelis Mikropoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
So, will this patch be applied?
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3078
___
___
Aristotelis Mikropoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Is the patch, now, in an acceptable format?
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1778443
___
Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Skip, are you still maintaining this?
--
assignee: - skip.montanaro
nosy: +skip.montanaro
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1778443
Aristotelis Mikropoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Yes, why not?
Actually, I am the original author of the patch, but I changed my
username like I said above (in a previous post).
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aristotelis Mikropoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Oh, I am sorry, I thought you were talking to me. Excuse me.
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1778443
___
Raymond Hettinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Sorry, I don't see any value in this kind of patch.
The line contline = += line is broken. The += transformations and
else-clause eliminations trivially re-arrange code without any real
savings. The while 1 to while True transformation
Raymond Hettinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
These changes mostly look fine but shouldn't go it until after the
beta. This is really the wrong time in the release cycle to be making
minor spacing changes and making it harder to get a meaningful svn
ann.
BTW, the first change
Aristotelis Mikropoulos [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
OK
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1778443
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Jesse Noller [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I believe this is a Linux-specific problem relating to chroot jails
missing the /dev/shm filesystem.
I am suggesting we skip the test for now if /dev/shm does not exist,
via:
if (sys.platform.startswith(linux):
if not
Sam Pablo Kuper [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Using non-ASCII characters in an optparse help string also causes
UnicodeDecodeErrors. Here's the relevant part of the traceback:
File /home/spk30/opt/ActivePython-2.5/lib/python2.5/optparse.py, line
1655, in print_help
Skip Montanaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Jesse Per skip's email:
Jesse FWIW, it appears that Solaris doesn't define SEM_VALUE_MAX but does
Jesse define
Jesse _SEM_VALUE_MAX in sys/params.h.
...
Thanks for submitting the bug report. I wonder why the processing
Mark Dickinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I suspect that what's happening is that errno is being set to ERANGE
on a subnormal results; this is somewhat ... um ... unorthodox.
In that case, the fix would be to raise OverflowError when errno is set to
ERANGE and the function result x
Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Raymond, mind if we roll back your previous (incorrect) changes? They
really should not have been submitted in the first place.
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3056
Raymond Hettinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
No problem. Whatever you think is best.
Still hoping that Jeffrey can take a look at the mixin approach and the
__rand__ logic. No one else seems to have an interest and I won't have
time to write the tests for a few days (they are
Adam Olsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I don't see a problem with skipping it, but if chroot is the problem,
maybe the chroot environment should be fixed to include /dev/shm?
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3111
Jesse Noller [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I agree, fixing the chroot is the long-term solution, however this gets us
over the beta hump
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3111
___
Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Well, it's time for another update on my progress...
Some good news first: Atomic Grouping is now completed, tested and
documented, and as stated above, is classified as issue2636-01 and
related patches. Secondly, with caveats listed
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10052/issue2636-09.patch
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10467/issue2636.diff
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10428/issue2636-05-only.diff
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10468/issue2636-05.diff
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10469/issue2636-07.diff
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10470/issue2636-07-only.diff
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636
___
Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I have finished work on the Atomic Grouping / Possessive Qualifiers
support and am including a patch to achieve this; however,
http://bugs.python.org/issue2636 should be consulted for the complete list
of changes in the works for the
Changes by Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file9897/PyLibDiffs.txt
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue433030
___
Adam Olsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I agree with your agreement.
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3111
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing
Jeffrey C. Jacobs [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Sorry, as I stated in the last post, I generated the patches then realized
that I was missing the documentation for Item 2, so I have updated the
issue2636-02.patch file and am attaching that separately until the next
release of the patch
Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Jesse, I say go ahead and make it so. I think you should make another
report thought to keep track of getting /dev/shm in the buildbot
enviroment. (Is that a buildbot bug?)
--
assignee: - jnoller
Mark Dickinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I further suspect that no-one with access to ia64 is monitoring this
issue. :-)
So maybe this should just be checked in, and then reverted if it either
causes other buildbots to fail or doesn't help with Ubuntu/ia64.
Benjamin, are you in a
Mark Dickinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Could you provide some tests for the fixed behaviour?
I'll try to check this in (with appropriate tests) after the beta.
--
assignee: - marketdickinson
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
It looks fine to me. Please apply.
--
assignee: - marketdickinson
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3118
___
Mark Dickinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Committed, r64349. I'm watching the buildbots.
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3118
___
___
Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 4:17 PM, Mark Dickinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Dickinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Committed, r64349. I'm watching the buildbots.
You can bet I am, too. :)
Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I do not understand why you think that having the interpreter display
dict_keys: 2, 3, 4, ...
when x.keys() is called is not an improvement over
dict_keys object at 0xe72b0
I didn't say that the change in dict_keys is not an improvement,
New submission from Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
It seems the new modifiers to the struct.unpack/pack module that were
proposed in PEP 3118 haven't been implemented yet.
--
assignee: teoliphant
messages: 68347
nosy: benjamin.peterson, teoliphant
priority: critical
severity:
Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Thanks Mark. That seems to have done the trick.
--
resolution: - fixed
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3118
Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I committed the skip in r64356. Let's sit back and watch.
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3111
___
Jesse Noller [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Did you add the import and fix the syntax error
On Jun 17, 2008, at 6:44 PM, Benjamin Peterson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I committed the skip in r64356. Let's sit back and watch.
Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
1 for 2. :)
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3111
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Jesse Noller [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I apologize, I should have just posted the diff
On Jun 17, 2008, at 7:00 PM, Benjamin Peterson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
1 for 2. :)
___
Python
Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Jesse Noller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jesse Noller [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I apologize, I should have just posted the diff
It's not your fault. I'm impatient.
Alexey Shamrin [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
sampablokuper, I don't think your problem is relevant to this issue. In
addition to encoding declaration you should use unicode strings: uyour
non-ASCII text. Or wait for Python 3.0, where strings will be unicode
by default.
Mark Dickinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
It looks like there's a refcounting bug in the code: if the call to
PyNumber_Multiply fails then iobj gets DECREF'd twice. This means that a
keyboard interrupt of factorial() can exit the interpreter:
Python 2.6a3+ (trunk:64341M, Jun 17
Skip Montanaro [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I suppose I'm as good a person to continue maintaining this as any,
though my time is largely spent doing other stuff these days. The patch
doesn't apply cleanly right now and lots of the changes it suggests have
been made already (or done in
Changes by Skip Montanaro [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file8179/robotparser.py.patch
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1778443
___
Changes by Skip Montanaro [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10617/robotparser.py.patch
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1778443
___
Sam Pablo Kuper [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
ash, you are correct; my bad. Thanks for the heads-up.
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2931
___
64 matches
Mail list logo
