Hi!
A single-character diff...
On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 04:25:59AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> --- marshal.c 27 Jun 2004 16:51:46 - 1.79
> +++ marshal.c 20 Dec 2004 12:25:57 - 1.80
> @@ -893,7 +893,7 @@
> {
> PyObject *x;
> int version = Py_MARSHAL_VERSION;
> -
On Mon, Dec 20, 2004, Armin Rigo wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> A single-character diff...
>
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 04:25:59AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> --- marshal.c27 Jun 2004 16:51:46 - 1.79
>> +++ marshal.c20 Dec 2004 12:25:57 - 1.80
>> @@ -893,7 +893,7 @@
>>
[Armin]
> Crash. Which means that there is no way in 2.4.0 to marshal an object
in the
> > old version format as a string -- you'd have to work around by
writing a real
> > file and reading it back :-(
[Aahz]
> Brown bag time?
Perhaps a rather quick Py2.4.1 would be in order.
Ideally, it shoul
On Mon, 2004-12-20 at 12:48, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> Perhaps a rather quick Py2.4.1 would be in order.
+1
-Barry
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.python.o
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> Perhaps a rather quick Py2.4.1 would be in order.
sounds like a good idea. +1 from here.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.
On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:03:13 -0500, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-12-20 at 12:48, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>
> > Perhaps a rather quick Py2.4.1 would be in order.
>
> +1
Nothing wrong with an incremental release, but none of these sound
like critical bugs to me.
Jeremy
I wanted to create a doc patch belonging to my patch #1062060,
but got this error when trying to build the documentation from CVS:
(/opt/PythonBugDay/python/dist/src/Doc/commontex/reportingbugs.tex
Underfull \hbox (badness 1) in paragraph at lines 13--17
[]\OT1/ptm/m/n/10 All bug re-ports
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
Perhaps a rather quick Py2.4.1 would be in order.
Ideally, it should include other important fixes:
[...]
* Fix for off-by-one bug in urllib.URLopener.retrieve
http://www.python.org/sf/810023
(assigned to me)
Is http://www.python.org/sf/1062060 perhaps of similar im
> Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> > Perhaps a rather quick Py2.4.1 would be in order.
> >
> > Ideally, it should include other important fixes:
> [...]
> > * Fix for off-by-one bug in urllib.URLopener.retrieve
> >http://www.python.org/sf/810023
> >(assigned to me)
>
> Is http://www.python.org/s
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
* Fix for off-by-one bug in urllib.URLopener.retrieve
http://www.python.org/sf/810023
(assigned to me)
Is http://www.python.org/sf/1062060 perhaps of similar importance?
(fix for urllib.urlretrieve silently truncating download)
That seems reasonable to me. There is n
Irmen de Jong wrote:
Also, I'm not sure how a test-case should be constructed
for this patch? Can the Python regression test download stuff
as part of a test? Or is there some other way to make a
testcase for this.
Hmm - perhaps start a server on the local machine at the start of the test,
and tea
On Mon, Dec 20, 2004, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:03:13 -0500, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2004-12-20 at 12:48, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>>>
>>> Perhaps a rather quick Py2.4.1 would be in order.
>>
>> +1
>
> Nothing wrong with an incremental release, but
On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:25:39 -0500, Aahz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2004, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:03:13 -0500, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2004-12-20 at 12:48, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps a rather quick Py2.4.1 woul
[Jeremy Hylton on a quick 2.4.1]
>>> Nothing wrong with an incremental release, but none of these sound
>>> like critical bugs to me.
[Aahz]
>> You don't think a blowup in marshal is critical? Mind expanding on
>> that?
[Jeremy]
> An undocumented extension to marshal causes a segfault. It's
> c
14 matches
Mail list logo
