sbt <shibt...@gmail.com> added the comment: > I think this is indeed useful, but I'm tempted to go further and say we > should make this the default - and only - behavior. This will probably > break existing code that accidentaly relied the fact that the > implementation uses a bare fork(), but i'd say it's worth it:
I'm not convinced about making it the default behaviour, and certainly not the only one. I have a working patch which ensures that leaked semaphores get cleaned up on exit. However, I think to add proper tests for the patch, test_multiprocessing needs to be refactored. Maybe we could end up with multiprocessing_common.py test_multiprocessing_processes_fork.py test_multiprocessing_processes_nofork.py test_multiprocessing_manager_fork.py test_multiprocessing_manager_nofork.py test_multiprocessing_threads.py test_multiprocessing_others.py The actual unittests would be in multiprocessing_common.py and test_multiprocessing_others.py. The other files would run the unittests in multiprocessing_common.py using different configurations. Thoughts? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue8713> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
