Message174580
| Author |
chris.jerdonek |
| Recipients |
asvetlov, chris.jerdonek, ezio.melotti, gregory.p.smith, neologix, pitrou, tim.golden |
| Date |
2012年11月02日.21:17:58 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1351891079.01.0.218098995026.issue16353@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> Well, the question then becomes whether Popen() shouldn't use the user's default shell instead? :)
That's a good question, too. :) I was thinking just in terms of supporting the status quo. Maybe two functions would be useful? (as suggested also by Andrew)
I do think the question of changing Popen()'s behavior should be decided independently of this issue though. In other words, even if we change Popen() in the future, I think exposing the system default shell would still be worthwhile. |
|