Message344697
| Author |
giampaolo.rodola |
| Recipients |
giampaolo.rodola, pablogsal, vstinner |
| Date |
2019年06月05日.10:22:17 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1559730137.72.0.105038405171.issue37157@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> I'm not sure that attempt to call unlink() if FICLONE fails is a good idea
Agreed.
> I dislike the *fallback* parameter of reflink().
Me too. A specific exception is better.
> Why not exposing clonefile() as os.clonefile() but os._clonefile()?
Mmm... I'm not sure it's worth it. The only reason one may want to use clonefile() directly is for passing CLONE_NOFOLLOW and CLONE_NOOWNERCOPY flags (the only possible ones):
- CLONE_NOFOLLOW can be exposed via "follow_symlinks=True" (like other shutil.* functions) and used internally
- CLONE_NOOWNERCOPY should also be passed internally by default because all other functions of shutil do not copy ownership (there's a warning at the top of the doc), so I think it makes sense for reflink() to do the same.
> +#if defined(MAC_OS_X_VERSION_10_12): Would it be possible to use a runtime check?
Good point. It should definitively be loaded at runtime. I will look into that (but not soon). |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2019年06月05日 10:22:17 | giampaolo.rodola | set | recipients:
+ giampaolo.rodola, vstinner, pablogsal |
| 2019年06月05日 10:22:17 | giampaolo.rodola | set | messageid: <1559730137.72.0.105038405171.issue37157@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| 2019年06月05日 10:22:17 | giampaolo.rodola | link | issue37157 messages |
| 2019年06月05日 10:22:17 | giampaolo.rodola | create |
|