Message112323
| Author |
jaraco |
| Recipients |
brian.curtin, eric.smith, jaraco |
| Date |
2010年08月01日.13:40:10 |
| SpamBayes Score |
0.004929542 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1280670013.31.0.176302810602.issue9333@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
I'm not sure the setting has to be restored. All that's being added is an attempt to assign the symlink privilege to the current process token.
I would consider to attempt to assign the privilege when the Python process starts up (or when os is loaded) - and if the privilege can't be assigned, remove the .symlink function from os. This change could be coupled with also removing .symlink if running on XP (rather than raising the NotImplementedError).
This approach would avoid the need to expose additional functions, and most importantly would work best with existing implementations -- namely, that if os.symlink exists, one can create symlinks. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2010年08月01日 13:40:13 | jaraco | set | recipients:
+ jaraco, eric.smith, brian.curtin |
| 2010年08月01日 13:40:13 | jaraco | set | messageid: <1280670013.31.0.176302810602.issue9333@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2010年08月01日 13:40:11 | jaraco | link | issue9333 messages |
| 2010年08月01日 13:40:10 | jaraco | create |
|