On 02/22/2016 10:48 AM, Burton, Ross wrote: > On 22 February 2016 at 16:37, Aníbal Limón <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I agree with you to modify avoid_paths_in_environ for return the new >> PATH variable is better than only modify it internally but for >> simplicity i will maintain the os.environ['PATH'] set/restore instead of >> generate the environment line. >> > > Totally agree with Randy here for what it's worth. The environment-munging > code in avoid_paths... should return the strings instead of manipulating > the current environment so the caller has the choice whether to modify the > current environment or pass a new environment to subprocess. And in > general I'd say that passing modified environments to subprocess is a > cleaner solution as it means that there's no way cleanup can fail to > happen. Whilst that's just a try/except now, the code could get copied and > extended and end up with codepaths that don't hit the right cleanup. By > having an explicit environment passed in, this isn't possible.
Agree, now modified at, http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/commit/?h=alimon/esdk_update_v2&id=3143bf09130c52cd71e3f2f9795208e17152005d Cheers, alimon > > Ross >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
