Patrik Iselind added the comment: OK, for now. Let's disregard my idea that stderr is swallowed. At some point these test might have worked under coverage.
I was more thinking to bisect cpython. Perhaps i can find a revision that works. Patrik Den 24 dec 2016 20:26 skrev "Ned Batchelder" <rep...@bugs.python.org>: > > Ned Batchelder added the comment: > > I don't believe this is coverage.py's fault, so I don't have an answer to > your question. There is no revision of coverage.py that *does* swallow > stderr. Also, as you can see from the test output, it isn't swallowed, > it's not being captured where it should be captured, but it is appearing on > the terminal. I see more than 60 uses of captured_stderr in the Python > test suite. If coverage.py were swallowing stderr, I would expect dozens of > test failures. The problem is more subtle. > > If you want, you can bisect against any revision of coverage.py you like, > perhaps the released 4.2? > > ---------- > > _______________________________________ > Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> > <http://bugs.python.org/issue29048> > _______________________________________ > ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue29048> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
