This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub ,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
| Author | pitrou |
|---|---|
| Recipients | alex, christian.heimes, dstufft, hynek, jcea, neologix, pitrou, tarek, vstinner |
| Date | 2013年08月16日.17:32:27 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1376674336.2510.6.camel@fsol> |
| In-reply-to | <CAH_1eM313AZs-o=Xm6J_mxo1MRqEdo7iA8N2FWXkv0Zuzg4QfA@mail.gmail.com> |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> Why didn't you include ENODEV? > Apparently it can be reported in some corner cases, e.g. in this patch: > http://lfs-matrix.net/patches/downloads/linux/linux-2.6.14.2-pseudo_random-1.patch That isn't mentioned in the POSIX open() spec: http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/open.html However ENODEV still seems to be a standard errno constant, so why not: http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/errno.h.html > Otherwise, wouldn't self.addCleanup be simpler than the large > try/finally block in the test (but it's not available on 2.7)? The problem is if some code tries to create a fd before the cleanup callback is called. With a try/finally block we're guaranteed not to have such a problem. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2013年08月16日 17:32:28 | pitrou | set | recipients: + pitrou, jcea, vstinner, christian.heimes, tarek, alex, neologix, hynek, dstufft |
| 2013年08月16日 17:32:28 | pitrou | link | issue18756 messages |
| 2013年08月16日 17:32:27 | pitrou | create | |