On 5/17/2013 12:42 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On May 16, 2013, at 04:52 PM, Terry Jan Reedy wrote:
Do failures only occur during compileall process? (or whatever substitute you
use).
No, they are all post-installation failures in unrelated packages that try to
import pure-Python modules.
What I mean is, is the corruption (not the detection of corruption) only
happening during mass compilation of the stdlib? When user imports a
single non-stdlib file he has written the first time, does that ever get
corrupted.
> AFAICT, the post-installation byte-compilation scripts are not erroring.
I THINK that you are answering my question by saying that corruption
only happens during installation mass compilation.
Doing a post-compilation verification step might be interesting, but I bet
backporting atomic renames to py_compile.py will fix the problem, or at least
band-aid over it. ;)
I intended to suggest that py_compile be changed to do that. Then Brett
said it already had for 3.4. I see no reason why not to backport, but
maybe someone else will.
The main design use of marshal is to produce .pyc files that consist of
a prefix and marshalled codeobject. Perhaps marshal.dump(s) should be
extended to take a third prefix='' parameter that would be prepended to
the result as produced today. .dump first does .dumps, though inline. I
assume that .dumps constructs a string by starting with [], appending
pieces, and joining. At least, any composite object dump would. The
change would amount to starting with [prefix] instead of []. Then
py_compile would amount to
pyc = <pyc-prefix>
marshal.dump(codeobject, file, pyc)
Terry
_______________________________________________
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
