Re: [Python-Dev] [python-committers] Winding down 3.4
If they're really all wontfix, maybe we should mark them as wontfix, thus giving 3.4 a sendoff worthy of its heroic stature. Godspeed, and may a flight of angels sing thee to thy rest, //arry/ On 08/20/2018 05:52 AM, Victor Stinner wrote: > "shutil copy* unsafe on POSIX - they preserve setuid/setgit bits" > https://bugs.python.org/issue17180 There is no fix. A fix may break the backward compatibility. Is it really worth it for the last 3.4 release? > "XML vulnerabilities in Python" > https://bugs.python.org/issue17239 Bug inactive since 2015. I don't expect that anyone will step in next weeks with a wonderful solution to all XML issues. I suggest to ignore this one as well, this issue is as old as XML support in Python and I am not aware of any victim of these issues. Obviously, it would be "nice" to see a fix for these issues but it seems like core devs are more interested to work on other topics and other security issues. > "fflush called on pointer to potentially closed file" (Windows only) > https://bugs.python.org/issue19050 It seems like two core devs are opposed to fix this issue. -- There are open security issues on the HTTP server and urllib. I am more concerned by these issues, but it's hard to fix them, there is a risk of introducing regressions. Victor ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] Starting to use gcc-8 on upstream Python project CI
On 20.8.2018 20:02, Jun Aruga wrote: Dear Python sig. Someone can you help to promote for the upstream Python project to use gcc-8 on the Travis CI test? Right now the project has 4 test cases [1] including defaut gcc version 4.8 cases on Travis CI. However technically it is possible to use gcc-N (4.8, 5, 6, 7, 8, and etc) on Travis CI. I think that using the latest version gcc-8 on the upstream project is quite beneficial for us. Because maybe we Fedora people are working to fix new version gcc's issues. When the python project start to use gcc-8, it is easy to share the situation publicly outside of Fedora, and of course they can help to check the issues. As I checked the Python project's .travis.yml, I had no idea about how to add gcc-8 case. ;( I can show you 2 cases to use the technique as an example. [2][3] [1] Python https://travis-ci.org/python/cpython https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/master/.travis.yml [2] Ruby https://travis-ci.org/junaruga/ruby/builds/418242410 https://github.com/junaruga/ruby/blob/feature/ci-new-gcc/.travis.yml https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/1937 [3] A project I am working as a hobby. https://travis-ci.org/trinityrnaseq/trinityrnaseq https://github.com/trinityrnaseq/trinityrnaseq/blob/master/.travis.yml I'm taking this to python-dev@python.org which is more appropriate place to discuss this. I think Victor is involved in the CIs, is that right? -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] unsolicited removal request
Chances are, Andrew click the unsubscribe link from an email reply that Abdur-Rahmaan made (this happens to me semi-regularly). On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 at 09:34 Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer wrote: > no idea, a mail popped up in my inbox ... > > > Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer > https://github.com/Abdur-rahmaanJ > Mauritius > >> ___ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: > https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/brett%40python.org > ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] improvement on shutil.make_archive
20.08.18 18:18, Paul Moore пише: I expect that PR suggesting some improvements to the documentation would be very welcome - in particular, the section would almost certainly benefit from some examples. If that's something you'd feel comfortable doing, that would be great. There is an open documentation issue for shutil.make_archive(): https://bugs.python.org/issue22021 ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] unsolicited removal request
I apologize, that's my IP, and i was trying to remove myself from the list. How that request got associated with you, I haven't the foggiest. I certainly was not intended. Andrew Hettinger http://Prominic.NET | Skype: AndrewProminic Tel: 866.339.3169 (toll free) -or- 1.217.356.2888 x. 110 (int'l) Fax: 866.372.3356 (toll free) -or- 1.217.356.3356(int'l) From: "Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer" To: "Python Dev" Date: 08/20/2018 01:43 Subject:[Python-Dev] unsolicited removal request Sent by:"Python-Dev" just notifying that 199.103.2.101 was trying to remove me from this list. might try to remove others yours, Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer https://github.com/Abdur-rahmaanJ Mauritius___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/ahettinger%40prominic.net ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] unsolicited removal request
no idea, a mail popped up in my inbox ... Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer https://github.com/Abdur-rahmaanJ Mauritius > ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [python-committers] Winding down 3.4
On 20/08/2018 14:52, Victor Stinner wrote: >> "shutil copy* unsafe on POSIX - they preserve setuid/setgit bits" >> https://bugs.python.org/issue17180 > There is no fix. A fix may break the backward compatibility. Is it really > worth it for the last 3.4 release? > My idea would be to focus on a "fix" for 3.8, and then decide if it can, in one form or another, be backported. And also how far. IMHO - the discussion about breakage is holding back even an attempt for a resolution for 3.8. Michael signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] improvement on shutil.make_archive
On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 at 15:58, Zhao Lee wrote: > > The current behavior of shutil.make_archive caused many issues , the problem > is mainly on the extracted archive directory hierarchy. These are the proofs: > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/51914467/directory-hierarchy-issue-when-using-shutil-make-archive > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/32640053/compressing-directory-using-shutil-make-archive-while-preserving-directory-str > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41624800/shutil-make-archive-issue-dont-want-directories-included-in-zip-file > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/50156657/unexpected-file-using-shutil-make-archive-to-compress-file > For example , if I want to create a zip archive of the pip package (path > specified by pip.__path__[0])), and need a directory named pip to hold the > files and folders which originally reside in the pip package when unpacking > the archive, then I need give root_dirparameter of shutil.make_archive the > parent directory of the pippackage path > (root_dir=Path(pip.__path__[0]).parent), and then the base_dir parameter the > final path component of the pip package > path(base_dir=Path(pip.__path__[0]).name) , so it is os.path.join(root_dir, > base_dir) that specified the directory to archive , so weird !!! > I suggest to change shutil.make_archive(base_name, format[, root_dir[, > base_dir]]) to shutil.make_archive(base_name, format[, archived_dir[, > archive_prfix]]) where archived_dirdenotes the path to be archived and > archive_prfix denotes the common prefix of all files and directories in the > archive (it is just a path component and we shouldn’t assume the existence of > it on the file system). > > If the current behavior of shutil.make_archive won’t be changed , I’d suggest > improve its doc, because so many people couldn’t grasp the use of > shutil.make_archive even consulting the doc , these are the proofs: > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/45245079/python-how-to-use-shutil-make-archive > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/30049201/how-to-compress-a-file-with-shutil-make-archive-in-python > Thanks for your interest, and for pointing out this problem. Personally, I don't see that much of an issue with the current documentation of base_dir and root_dir. But as a native English speaker with a pretty long history of working with and reading programming documentation, that's easy for me to say... I expect that PR suggesting some improvements to the documentation would be very welcome - in particular, the section would almost certainly benefit from some examples. If that's something you'd feel comfortable doing, that would be great. Paul ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Python-Dev] improvement on shutil.make_archive
The current behavior of shutil.make_archive caused many issues , the problem is mainly on the extracted archive directory hierarchy. These are the proofs: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/51914467/directory-hierarchy-issue-when-using-shutil-make-archive https://stackoverflow.com/questions/32640053/compressing-directory-using-shutil-make-archive-while-preserving-directory-str https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41624800/shutil-make-archive-issue-dont-want-directories-included-in-zip-file https://stackoverflow.com/questions/50156657/unexpected-file-using-shutil-make-archive-to-compress-file For example , if I want to create a zip archive of the pip package (path specified by pip.__path__[0])), and need a directory named pip to hold the files and folders which originally reside in the pip package when unpacking the archive, then I need give root_dirparameter of shutil.make_archive the parent directory of the pippackage path (root_dir=Path(pip.__path__[0]).parent), and then the base_dir parameter the final path component of the pip package path(base_dir=Path(pip.__path__[0]).name) , so it is os.path.join(root_dir, base_dir) that specified the directory to archive , so weird !!! I suggest to change shutil.make_archive(base_name, format[, root_dir[, base_dir]]) to shutil.make_archive(base_name, format[, archived_dir[, archive_prfix]]) where archived_dirdenotes the path to be archived and archive_prfix denotes the common prefix of all files and directories in the archive (it is just a path component and we shouldn’t assume the existence of it on the file system). If the current behavior of shutil.make_archive won’t be changed , I’d suggest improve its doc, because so many people couldn’t grasp the use of shutil.make_archive even consulting the doc , these are the proofs: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/45245079/python-how-to-use-shutil-make-archive https://stackoverflow.com/questions/30049201/how-to-compress-a-file-with-shutil-make-archive-in-python ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] unsolicited removal request
ah yes, that's it. thank you ! Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer https://github.com/Abdur-rahmaanJ Mauritius On Mon, 20 Aug 2018, 17:41 Ryan Gonzalez, wrote: > I think you generally want to sent this to the list administrators > directly, but FWIW this has happened to me before. If it doesn't come up > again, you can probably ignore it. > > On Mon, Aug 20, 2018, 1:43 AM Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer < > arj.pyt...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> just notifying that 199.103.2.101 >> was trying to remove me from this list. might try to remove others >> >> yours, >> >> Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer >> https://github.com/Abdur-rahmaanJ >> Mauritius >> ___ >> Python-Dev mailing list >> Python-Dev@python.org >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev >> Unsubscribe: >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/rymg19%40gmail.com >> > -- > > Ryan (ライアン) > Yoko Shimomura, ryo (supercell/EGOIST), Hiroyuki Sawano >> everyone else > https://refi64.com/ > ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] unsolicited removal request
I think you generally want to sent this to the list administrators directly, but FWIW this has happened to me before. If it doesn't come up again, you can probably ignore it. On Mon, Aug 20, 2018, 1:43 AM Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer wrote: > just notifying that 199.103.2.101 > was trying to remove me from this list. might try to remove others > > yours, > > Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer > https://github.com/Abdur-rahmaanJ > Mauritius > ___ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: > https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/rymg19%40gmail.com > -- Ryan (ライアン) Yoko Shimomura, ryo (supercell/EGOIST), Hiroyuki Sawano >> everyone else https://refi64.com/ ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [python-committers] Winding down 3.4
> "shutil copy* unsafe on POSIX - they preserve setuid/setgit bits" > https://bugs.python.org/issue17180 There is no fix. A fix may break the backward compatibility. Is it really worth it for the last 3.4 release? > "XML vulnerabilities in Python" > https://bugs.python.org/issue17239 Bug inactive since 2015. I don't expect that anyone will step in next weeks with a wonderful solution to all XML issues. I suggest to ignore this one as well, this issue is as old as XML support in Python and I am not aware of any victim of these issues. Obviously, it would be "nice" to see a fix for these issues but it seems like core devs are more interested to work on other topics and other security issues. > "fflush called on pointer to potentially closed file" (Windows only) > https://bugs.python.org/issue19050 It seems like two core devs are opposed to fix this issue. -- There are open security issues on the HTTP server and urllib. I am more concerned by these issues, but it's hard to fix them, there is a risk of introducing regressions. Victor ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Python-Dev] unsolicited removal request
just notifying that 199.103.2.101 was trying to remove me from this list. might try to remove others yours, Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer https://github.com/Abdur-rahmaanJ Mauritius ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
