Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org added the comment:
I updated the documentation and changed the close_fds default on Windows to be
True when possible per Giovanni's suggestion in r87229. That keeps the API and
defaults as consistent as possible across all platforms.
--
resolution: -
Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org added the comment:
P.S. Yes I will be backporting all of this to subprocess32.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7213
___
Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org added the comment:
Milko's subprocess-00/01/02 patch set have been committed with minor
modifications in r87207 r87208. Thanks, especially for the test cases!
Is there anything else left that we know about for this bug?
--
Giovanni Bajo giovannib...@gmail.com added the comment:
Hi Gregory,
will you backport Mirko's patches to subprocess32?
The last thing left in this bug is my proposal to change the default of
close_fds to True to Windows too, but at the same time detect whether this is
possible or not
STINNER Victor victor.stin...@haypocalc.com added the comment:
fd_status.py:
+try:
+_MAXFD = os.sysconf(SC_OPEN_MAX)
+except:
+_MAXFD = 256
It looks like this code (256 constant) comes from subprocess.py. Is that a good
value? On Linux, SC_OPEN_MAX is usually 1024, and it can be 4096.
Milko Krachounov pyt...@milko.3mhz.net added the comment:
For the Python implementation, the GIL is not enough to
ensure the atomicity of a process creation. That's why
_posixsubprocess was created. I suppose that other parts
of subprocess are not atomic and a lock is required to
ensure
Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org added the comment:
The close_fds default has been fixed in r87206 to remove the DeprecationWarning
and remain False on Windows. It changes to True on POSIX.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Milko Krachounov pyt...@milko.3mhz.net added the comment:
OK, I have created new updated patches. I haven't combined them in one patch
because some of the changes can be applied independently, the three patches can
be cat'ed together if anyone sees separate patches a problem. ;)
I. Changes:
*
Changes by Milko Krachounov pyt...@milko.3mhz.net:
Added file:
http://bugs.python.org/file20018/subprocess-01-atomic_cloexec_pipe2.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7213
___
Changes by Milko Krachounov pyt...@milko.3mhz.net:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file20019/subprocess-02-cloexec_tests.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7213
___
Changes by Milko Krachounov pyt...@milko.3mhz.net:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file20019/subprocess-02-cloexec_tests.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7213
___
Changes by Milko Krachounov pyt...@milko.3mhz.net:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file20020/subprocess-02-cloexec_tests.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7213
___
Changes by Milko Krachounov pyt...@milko.3mhz.net:
Removed file:
http://bugs.python.org/file20005/subprocess-cloexec-atomic-py3k.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7213
___
Changes by Milko Krachounov pyt...@milko.3mhz.net:
Removed file:
http://bugs.python.org/file20009/subprocess-cloexec-atomic-py3k-tests1.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7213
___
Changes by Milko Krachounov pyt...@milko.3mhz.net:
Removed file:
http://bugs.python.org/file20013/subprocess-cloexec-atomic-py3k-tests2-close_fds.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue7213
Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org added the comment:
Paul Giovanni: yes I hadn't given the windows side of things any thought when
I made the change for beta1.
Milko: The DISREGARD_FDS approach is basically what I was intending to do.
Also, there really wasn't any objection to going ahead and
16 matches
Mail list logo
