Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > If messages were only added, a new file is no longer created and > > renamed over the old file when flush() is called on an mbox, MMDF or > > Babyl mailbox. > > Why so? Appending is not atomic and, if it fails in the middle, you > could get a corrupt mbox file. > Furthermore, I disagree that it's a bugfix: IMO it should wait for 3.4.
The code previosly already appended messages to the end of the file when calling add(). This patch just changed it to not do a full rewrite when flush() is called. Having a partially written message in the end of your mailbox doesn't seem like a fatal corruption to me. Furthermore, I (and R. David Murray) think this is not so surprising for users. Most (or all) other implementations always write changes in-place without renaming, as this makes it possible to find out whether new mail has arrived. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
