Trent Mick wrote:
[Thomas Heller wrote]
Linking...
Creating library .\./python25.lib and object .\./python25.exp
zipimport.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __security_cookie
traceback.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __security_cookie
typeobject.obj : error
Neal Norwitz wrote:
On 3/22/06, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
For the Snake-Farm we had a separate mailing list, so I'd prefer
that if possible. This lets you opt-in to the messages and also
makes it easier to search via the python.org search facility.
I'll
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
And we still have someone actively interested in maintaining the OS2
port, it seems.
Dito for BeOS, now under the name Zeta OS.
Who is the one interested in maintaining the BeOS port? the last
checkins related to BeOS seem to originate from the
The Buildbot has detected a new failure of x86 gentoo trunk.
Full details are available at:
http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/all/x86%20gentoo%20trunk/builds/119
Buildbot URL: http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/all/
Build Reason:
Build Source Stamp: [branch trunk] HEAD
Blamelist:
On behalf of the Python development team and the Python
community, I'm happy to announce the release of Python 2.4.3
(release candidate 1).
Python 2.4.3 is a bug-fix release. See the release notes at
the website (also available as Misc/NEWS in the source
distribution) for details of the more
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006, Nick Coghlan wrote:
+1 on simply changing the messages to python-checkins instead of
here - it gives the build failure better context than it gets on
python-dev, and subscribing to python-checkins is a fair indication of
willingness to receive frequent automated mail ;)
The Buildbot has detected a new failure of x86 W2k trunk.
Full details are available at:
http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/all/x86%20W2k%20trunk/builds/122
Buildbot URL: http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/all/
Build Reason:
Build Source Stamp: [branch trunk] HEAD
Blamelist: martin.v.loewis
The Buildbot has detected a new failure of x86 XP trunk.
Full details are available at:
http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/all/x86%20XP%20trunk/builds/120
Buildbot URL: http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/all/
Build Reason:
Build Source Stamp: [branch trunk] HEAD
Blamelist: martin.v.loewis
The Buildbot has detected a new failure of x86 XP-2 trunk.
Full details are available at:
http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/all/x86%20XP-2%20trunk/builds/96
Buildbot URL: http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/all/
Build Reason:
Build Source Stamp: [branch trunk] HEAD
Blamelist:
Hi,
I've just submitted patch #1457227 which adds a convenience method to
datetime objects to get the timestamp. It's equivalent to
time.mktime(d.timetuple()), I just wanted to save myself some typing
and be able to write d.timestamp() instead.
I hope I have the dst code right. Would
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
That would be Donn Cave:
http://bebits.com/app/4232
He's also the one who wrote the Bethon wrapper for the BeOS C++ API.
BTW, the fact that you don't see new checkins doesn't necessarily
mean that a port is no longer used. It may just be that the existing
On 3/23/06, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have been looking into the (seemingly random) test_popen2
failures today, and found that it fails when the tests
I played with this some last night and found the same ordering. I
have a different patch that also fixes the problem. It also
Neal Norwitz wrote:
I played with this some last night and found the same ordering. I
have a different patch that also fixes the problem. It also fixes 2-3
bugs I think. Basically the child could be waited on from outside
popen (or from 2 threads). The question is what should we do if that
13 matches
Mail list logo
