Thanks for the explanation.

When is it desireable to use portable.rename instead of os.rename?
There are still some places in the code that use os.rename (file and
driver actions, I think).  Should new code be using portable.rename, or
are there situations where os.rename is still okay?

-j

On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 02:45:23PM -0500, Tom Mueller (pkg-discuss) wrote:
> On Unix, portable.rename is just os.rename.
> On Windows, portable.rename moves an existing file aside if there is one 
> before doing the rename, giving the same behavior as you get with Unix.
> 
> So to answer your question, portable.rename has the same limitation WRT 
> file system boundaries as os.rename.
> 
> Thanks for looking at this.
> Tom
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > These changes look okay to me.
> >
> > Does portable.rename prohibit renames across filesystem boundaries?
> > I ran into this with os.rename, which is why I ask.
> >
> > -j
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 01:55:55PM -0500, Tom Mueller (pkg-discuss) wrote:
> >   
> >> Issue: 4296 Catalog.recv uses os.rename rather than portable.rename
> >> http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=4296
> >>
> >> webrev: http://cr.opensolaris.org/~tmueller/cr-4296/
> >>
> >> The fix is per the suggestion in the bug (replace os.rename with 
> >> portable.rename)
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >> Tom
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> pkg-discuss mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
> >>     
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pkg-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to