There is still a serious regression in zipfile module:
http://bugs.python.org/issue6090
And I would really like to see my issue with difflib tabs committed: =/
http://bugs.python.org/issue7585
--
anatoly t.
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 4:09 AM, Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org wrote:
Let's
anatoly techtonik wrote:
There is still a serious regression in zipfile module:
http://bugs.python.org/issue6090
And I would really like to see my issue with difflib tabs committed: =/
http://bugs.python.org/issue7585
None of these are buildbot failures, so they can't go into 2.7b1,
by the
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
There is still a serious regression in zipfile module:
http://bugs.python.org/issue6090
And I would really like to see my issue with difflib tabs committed: =/
http://bugs.python.org/issue7585
None of these are
On 07/04/2010 11:30, anatoly techtonik wrote:
There is still a serious regression in zipfile module:
http://bugs.python.org/issue6090
And I would really like to see my issue with difflib tabs committed: =/
http://bugs.python.org/issue7585
The zipfile issue looks like it could be fixed for
anatoly techtonik wrote:
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 2:10 PM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
There is still a serious regression in zipfile module:
http://bugs.python.org/issue6090
And I would really like to see my issue with difflib tabs committed: =/
http://bugs.python.org/issue7585
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven
asmo...@in-nomine.org wrote:
Before I file a bug report, is anyone else seeing this (in my case on
FreeBSD 8):
Modules/_ctypes/libffi/src/x86/sysv.S:360: Error: junk at end of line, first
unrecognized character is `@'
-On [20100407 15:29], Martin v. Löwis (mar...@v.loewis.de) wrote:
Instead of submitting a bug report, it would be better to submit a
patch, though. Can you try having the build process use freebsd.S
instead of sysv.S?
Mark and me are looking at it right now.
I can compile ctypes using
2010/4/2 P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com:
[...]
* Paths under the base installation location are relative to the base
* Paths not under the base installation location, but under the installation
prefix, are also stored relative to the base, IF the base location is a
subpath of the
On 01:29 pm, mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
Mark Dickinson wrote:
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven
asmo...@in-nomine.org wrote:
Before I file a bug report, is anyone else seeing this (in my case on
FreeBSD 8):
Modules/_ctypes/libffi/src/x86/sysv.S:360: Error: junk at
Instead of submitting a bug report, it would be better to submit a
In *addition* to submitted a bug report, surely. :)
I'm not so sure. It's a ctypes/libffi bug, so most likely, nobody will
be able to fix it when reported. For platform-specific libffi bugs, the
patch most likely will come
-On [20100407 16:17], Martin v. Löwis (mar...@v.loewis.de) wrote:
I'm not so sure. It's a ctypes/libffi bug, so most likely, nobody will
be able to fix it when reported. For platform-specific libffi bugs, the
patch most likely will come from the submitter, as nobody else might
have access
At 04:01 PM 4/7/2010 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
2010/4/2 P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com:
[...]
* Paths under the base installation location are relative to the base
* Paths not under the base installation location, but under the
installation
prefix, are also stored relative to the base, IF
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 4:35 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
At 04:01 PM 4/7/2010 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
2010/4/2 P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com:
[...]
* Paths under the base installation location are relative to the base
* Paths not under the base installation location,
Martin v. Löwis martin at v.loewis.de writes:
Instead of submitting a bug report, it would be better to submit a
In *addition* to submitted a bug report, surely. :)
I'm not so sure. It's a ctypes/libffi bug, so most likely, nobody will
be able to fix it when reported.
It's probably
Hello all,
Not *strictly* on topic, but probably of interest nonetheless (so my
apologies).
Episode 11 of A Little Bit of Python is now available. An interview
with core-CPython developer Antoine Pitrou.
http://advocacy.python.org/podcasts/littlebit/2010-04-07.mp3
Many thanks to Antoine
(also, as I understand it, the latest ctypes issues seem to have popped up
after
an update of the bundled libffi, so perhaps that update wasn't totally right,
didn't choose the right libffi version, or missed some files?)
In the case of the SPARC issue: the bug is still exists in the libffi
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Tarek Ziadé ziade.ta...@gmail.com wrote:
so for the PEP :
- sys.prefix - the installation prefix provided by --prefix at
installation time
- site-packages - the installation libdir, provided by --install-lib
at installation time
How do you actually
At 04:40 PM 4/7/2010 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 4:35 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
At 04:01 PM 4/7/2010 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
2010/4/2 P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com:
[...]
* Paths under the base installation location are relative to the base
*
At 11:33 AM 4/7/2010 -0500, Ian Bicking wrote:
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Tarek Ziadé
mailto:ziade.ta...@gmail.comziade.ta...@gmail.com wrote:
so for the PEP :
- sys.prefix - the installation prefix provided by --prefix at
installation time
- site-packages - the installation libdir,
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 12:45 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
Examples under debian:
docutils/__init__.py - located in
/usr/local/lib/python2.6/site-packages/
../../../bin/rst2html.py - located in /usr/local/bin
/etc/whatever -
At 12:51 PM 4/7/2010 -0500, Ian Bicking wrote:
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 12:45 PM, P.J. Eby
mailto:p...@telecommunity.comp...@telecommunity.com wrote:
Examples under debian:
  docutils/__init__.py      -   located in
/usr/local/lib/python2.6/site-packages/
 Â
On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 12:54:51 +0100, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk
wrote:
On 07/04/2010 11:30, anatoly techtonik wrote:
There is still a serious regression in zipfile module:
http://bugs.python.org/issue6090
And I would really like to see my issue with difflib tabs committed: =/
R. David Murray writes:
A long time ago (in a galaxy far far...no, wrong show)
Er, as I was saying, a long time ago Barry applied a patch to
email that went more or less like this:
ndex: email/Encoders.py
===
---
I have commented out all tests in test_gdb, yet
http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/all/builders/sparc%20Ubuntu%20trunk/builds/47/steps/test/logs/stdio
still shows them being run. Can anybody explain that, please?
TIA,
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing
2010/4/7 Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de:
I have commented out all tests in test_gdb, yet
http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/all/builders/sparc%20Ubuntu%20trunk/builds/47/steps/test/logs/stdio
still shows them being run. Can anybody explain that, please?
That's because the buildbot only
25 matches
Mail list logo
