Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com added the comment:
It's quite alright. Thanks for finishing it up. I realize I ended up a by out
of my depth with regards to packaging's internals and the nuance involved in
this fix. Thanks for all the help
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file23388/7db732ac6796.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12344
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file23390/1bb1132840e6.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12344
Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com added the comment:
Still working with Éric to determine the proper behavior of
get_reinitialized_commands. Latest patch is known incorrect but a step closer
to our destination.
--
___
Python tracker rep
Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com added the comment:
I got a bit distracted and I think had some questions on the review. I will go
back over the state of this patch and get some feedback to you tonight or
tomorrow evening.
--
___
Python tracker
Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com added the comment:
It also creates an exe installer, not an MSI.
Why would you think it creates an MSI? bdist_wininst is not bdist_msi.
My concern for MSI is that this issue is referencing a change to MSI
generation. I never had any expectation
Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com added the comment:
I mean that msi is _not_ set as a valid format. I will verify this evening.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12449
Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com added the comment:
I was having a separate difficulty with bdist. Apparently -m packaging.run and
pysetup3 run don't perform identically, but that isn't relevant for this bug.
Regarding bdist, I got bdist_wininst to work but I had to modify the code in
place
Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com added the comment:
See also three comments about style on
http://bugs.python.org/review/8668/diff2/2845:3011/7845
I'm not sure I follow? The patch I attached does not violate the style
guidelines that you indicate in the comments. The only failing I see
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
--
nosy: +thomas.holmes
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12537
___
___
Python-bugs
Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com added the comment:
I have added a test and made some additional modifications. I had to modify the
very simple MyCmd object in test_command_cmd.py so that it would have some user
options with default values and support finalization
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22624/7c61eba07f3f.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12344
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file22624/7c61eba07f3f.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12344
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22625/115c0c10b3ba.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12344
Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com added the comment:
bdist does not appear to be enabled in 3.3 development branch, is this correct?
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12449
Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com added the comment:
I have made a patch based on your suggestions made to higery, Éric. I have two
questions:
1) In Distributions.get_reinitialized_command should the reinitialization of
the subcommands also get passed the kwargs? Unfortunately my
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22615/d863f392c094.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12344
Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com added the comment:
The output in my initial message is the output of the tests with them enabled
but pre database.py patch. Once the patch is applied all packaging tests that
run on my system pass.
I was 50/50 on whether or not to use the internal function
Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com added the comment:
Oh and thank you very much for your input. My apologies for the initial 9
e-mail spam when I created the issue, I bumbled the remote HG repository patch
generation :)
--
___
Python tracker rep
Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com added the comment:
I have made the change you suggested, creating a new list and simply amending
to minimize the diff. This new patch has been attached.
I looked through the rest of database.py and did not see any other generators
that appeared
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22612/6e15ba060803.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12504
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
--
nosy: +thomas.holmes
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue5342
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
--
assignee: tarek
components: Distutils2
nosy: alexis, eric.araujo, tarek, thomas.holmes
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: Uninstall has disabled windows tests
versions: Python 3.3
New submission from Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
Functions test_uninstall.test_uninstall and test_uninstall.test_remove_issue
were disabled for win32. Upon enabling them they generated failures.
I have worked up a patch that refactors a packaging.Distribution function
_get_records from
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
--
keywords: +patch
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22588/f333cd40cd56.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12504
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file22588/f333cd40cd56.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12504
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22589/dd470b122f32.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12504
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file22589/dd470b122f32.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12504
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22590/dcd66ae649b1.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12504
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file22590/dcd66ae649b1.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12504
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file22591/dcd66ae649b1-2.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12504
Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com added the comment:
I setup a proxy and it seems to be working properly. This is on win7 x64
professional using Python 2.7.1
I didn't using any sniffing software but if I broke the proxy the code broke.
When I enabled the proxy it started working again. My
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
--
nosy: +Thomas.Holmes
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11873
___
___
Python-bugs
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
--
nosy: +thomas.holmes
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12449
___
___
Python-bugs
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
--
nosy: +thomas.holmes
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8501
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Changes by Thomas Holmes tho...@devminded.com:
--
nosy: +thomas.holmes
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue828450
___
___
Python-bugs
Thomas Holmes sha...@gmail.com added the comment:
I made a new patch off of the 2.7 trunk version. I think I have handled some
of the issues more cleanly.
Please see Py(27)7325.diff
I addressed the issue of using a relative path in the tempdir to achieve the
'guaranteed' ability to write
Thomas Holmes sha...@gmail.com added the comment:
I agree, I do not feel like the precise changes to the tests feel completely
ideal. I feel that this problem stems from the fact that the nameCheck
function as originally written doesn't seem to completely serve its originally
intended
Thomas Holmes sha...@gmail.com added the comment:
Please disregard, I commented on the wrong issue.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue1752919
Changes by Thomas Holmes sha...@gmail.com:
--
nosy: -Thomas.Holmes
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue1752919
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Thomas Holmes sha...@gmail.com added the comment:
I agree, I do not feel like the precise changes to the tests feel completely
ideal. I feel that this problem stems from the fact that the nameCheck
function as originally written doesn't seem to completely serve its originally
intended
Thomas Holmes sha...@gmail.com added the comment:
One other thing that crossed my mind while I was thinking over this today.
Instead of just relative pathing to '.' I should probably change my path to
gettempdir() and then relative path to it since the location of the python
executable may
Thomas Holmes sha...@gmail.com added the comment:
I have created a patch for this for Python 3.1 and included an update to the
unit tests. The tests were never checking for a relative path and if they did
would pas it even when it would have failed due to liberal use of
os.path.abspath
Thomas Holmes sha...@gmail.com added the comment:
As a side note, this was done mostly as an exercise for myself and as a
learning experience. Any feedback would be appreciated regardless of any
decision on the status of this bug.
--
___
Python
44 matches
Mail list logo
