Message332219
| Author |
serhiy.storchaka |
| Recipients |
gregory.p.smith, izbyshev, nanjekyejoannah, pablogsal, pitrou, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner |
| Date |
2018年12月20日.11:34:31 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1545305671.78.0.788709270274.issue35537@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> Do you mean running tests twice, one with posix_spawn(), one without?
I mean that after writing tests they can be tested manually by disabling conditions for posix_spawn one by one. I.e. some tests should fail if remove "stdout is None" and some tests should fail if remove "not close_fds", etc.
> Can you please elaborate? posix_spawn() may or may not use fork() internally.
_posixsubprocess.fork_exec() calls PyOS_BeforeFork/PyOS_AfterFork_Child/PyOS_AfterFork_Parent. If use os.posix_spawn(), these calls will be omitted. This is a behavior change. We should either call these functions manually before/after os.posix_spawn() (but I do not know what to do with PyOS_AfterFork_Child), or disable using os.posix_spawn() if non-trivial callbacks were added, or use other methods for calling registered callbacks. But the stdlib already adds callbacks in the threading and random modules. |
|