Re: [Python-Dev] test_uuid.py on HP NonStop Python-2.7.5 fails (test case: testIssue8621)

2013-11-28 Thread Armin Rigo
Hi,

On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 7:14 AM, V S, Nagendra (Nonstop Filesystems Team)
> on NonStop "uuid.py" falls throw to  random.range() call to generate the 
> random number

And indeed, the random module gets identical results in both parent
and child after a fork().  This seems to mean that the random module
is not safe to use in uuid without taking special care of this fact
(e.g. feeding back os.getpid() into the seed).


A bientôt,

Armin.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] test_uuid.py on HP NonStop Python-2.7.5 fails (test case: testIssue8621)

2013-11-28 Thread Christian Heimes
Am 28.11.2013 10:53, schrieb Armin Rigo:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 7:14 AM, V S, Nagendra (Nonstop Filesystems Team)
>> on NonStop "uuid.py" falls throw to  random.range() call to generate the 
>> random number
> 
> And indeed, the random module gets identical results in both parent
> and child after a fork().  This seems to mean that the random module
> is not safe to use in uuid without taking special care of this fact
> (e.g. feeding back os.getpid() into the seed).

Yes, there is an issue with the fallback to random, see my 17 months old
bug report: http://bugs.python.org/issue15206 The uuid module needs a
fork() aware random instance like the tempfile module.

Christian

___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] test_uuid.py on HP NonStop Python-2.7.5 fails (test case: testIssue8621)

2013-11-28 Thread V S, Nagendra (Nonstop Filesystems Team)
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 7:14 AM, V S, Nagendra (Nonstop Filesystems
> > Team)
> >> on NonStop "uuid.py" falls throw to  random.range() call to generate
> >> the random number
> >
> > And indeed, the random module gets identical results in both parent
> > and child after a fork().  This seems to mean that the random module
> > is not safe to use in uuid without taking special care of this fact
> > (e.g. feeding back os.getpid() into the seed).
> 
> Yes, there is an issue with the fallback to random, see my 17 months old bug
> report: http://bugs.python.org/issue15206 The uuid module needs a
> fork() aware random instance like the tempfile module.
> 
> Christian

Thanks all for your responses. I tried to something similar to what Armin was 
suggesting. Here is what I have done

def myuuid():
random.seed(time())  # or just could be random.seed() <-New 
addition
bytes = [chr(random.randrange(256)) for i in range(16)]
val = uuid.UUID(bytes=bytes, version=4)
return val

With this I was able to get a unique sequences in both parent & child after 
fork().I have tested this function by calling it a million times & every time 
there has been a unique sequence both in parent & child. Do you this can be  
fair enough work around for this problem.

Thanks & Regards
Nagendra.V.S
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] buildbot's are needlessly compiling -O0

2013-11-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Am 24.11.2013 08:13, schrieb Gregory P. Smith:
> our buildbots are setup to configure --with-pydebug which also
> unfortunately causes them to compile with -O0... this results in a python
> binary that is excruciatingly slow and makes the entire test suite run take
> a long time.
> 
> given that nobody is ever going to run a gdb or another debugger on the
> buildbot generated transient binaries themselves how about we speed all of
> the buildbot's up by adding CFLAGS=-O2 to the configure command line?
> 
> Sure, the compile step will take a bit longer but that is dwarfed by the
> test time as it is:
> 
> http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/AMD64%20Ubuntu%20LTS%203.x/builds/3224
> http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/ARMv7%203.x/builds/7
> http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/AMD64%20Snow%20Leop%203.x/builds/639
> 
> It should dramatically decrease the turnaround latency for buildbot results.

maybe check if the compiler understands -Og (GCC 4.8), and use that?  Otoh, it
would be good to check with -O2 or -O3 too, common values used when building
python for production use.

  Matthias

___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


[Python-Dev] PEP process entry point and ill fated initiatives

2013-11-28 Thread anatoly techtonik
I wanted to help people who are trying to find out more
about PEP submission process by providing relevant
info (or a pointer) in README.rst that is located at the
root of PEPs repository. You can see it here.

https://bitbucket.org/rirror/peps

I filled this issue with b.p.o

http://bugs.python.org/issue19822

However, as you may see, I met some resistance,
which said me to discuss the matter here. So, I'd like
to discuss two things:

1. is my README.rst enhancement request is wrong?
2. what makes people close tickets without providing
arguments, but using stuff like "should"?

It is not the first stuff that I personally find discouraging,
which may be attributed to my reputation, but what's the
point in doing this?

The only logical explanation I find for resistance in this
particular case is that people in core Python
development don't take usability and user experience
matters seriously. Most of core development is about
systems, not about people, so everybody is scratching
own itches. I wish that usability and UX was given at
least some coverage in Python development regulations.
--
anatoly t.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] PEP process entry point and ill fated initiatives

2013-11-28 Thread Guido van Rossum
Anatoly, the Python community is a lot more diverse than you think. "Pull
requests" (whatever that means) are not the way to start a PEP. You should
start by focusing on the contents, and the mechanics of editing it and
getting it formatted properly are secondary. The process is explained in
PEP one. Your bug report would have gotten a much better response if you
had simply asked "what is the process, I can't figure it out from the
repo's README" rather that (again) complaining that the core developers
don't care. Offending people is not the way to get them to help you.


On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 9:45 AM, anatoly techtonik wrote:

> I wanted to help people who are trying to find out more
> about PEP submission process by providing relevant
> info (or a pointer) in README.rst that is located at the
> root of PEPs repository. You can see it here.
>
> https://bitbucket.org/rirror/peps
>
> I filled this issue with b.p.o
>
> http://bugs.python.org/issue19822
>
> However, as you may see, I met some resistance,
> which said me to discuss the matter here. So, I'd like
> to discuss two things:
>
> 1. is my README.rst enhancement request is wrong?
> 2. what makes people close tickets without providing
> arguments, but using stuff like "should"?
>
> It is not the first stuff that I personally find discouraging,
> which may be attributed to my reputation, but what's the
> point in doing this?
>
> The only logical explanation I find for resistance in this
> particular case is that people in core Python
> development don't take usability and user experience
> matters seriously. Most of core development is about
> systems, not about people, so everybody is scratching
> own itches. I wish that usability and UX was given at
> least some coverage in Python development regulations.
> --
> anatoly t.
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org
>



-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


[Python-Dev] py.ini documentation improvement

2013-11-28 Thread Tim Delaney
I was just getting Jython working with py.exe, and I think the
documentation can be made a bit more friendly. In particular think we can
make it easier for people to determine the correct folder by changing the
line in 3.4.4.1 Customization via INI files:

Two .ini files will be searched by the launcher - py.ini in the current
user’s "application data" directory (i.e. the directory returned by calling
the Windows function SHGetFolderPath with CSIDL_LOCAL_APPDATA) and py.ini
in the same directory as the launcher.

to

Two .ini files will be searched by the launcher - py.ini in the current
user’s "application data" directory (i.e. the directory returned by
executing `echo %LOCALAPPDATA%` in a command window) and py.ini in the same
directory as the launcher.

%LOCALAPPDATA% should always contain the same value as would be returned
from SHGetFolderPath with CSIDL_LOCAL_APPDATA.

Tim Delaney
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] py.ini documentation improvement

2013-11-28 Thread Glenn Linderman

On 11/28/2013 1:04 PM, Tim Delaney wrote:


%LOCALAPPDATA% should always contain the same value as would be 
returned from SHGetFolderPath with CSIDL_LOCAL_APPDATA.
Except when it gets changed. Documentation should reflect the actual use 
in the code. If it uses the SHGetFolderPath, that is what should be 
documented; if it uses the environment variable, that is what should get 
documented. Users can easily change the environment variable (which 
might be a reason to use it, instead of SHGetFolderPath).
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] py.ini documentation improvement

2013-11-28 Thread Tim Delaney
On 29 November 2013 08:34, Glenn Linderman  wrote:

>  On 11/28/2013 1:04 PM, Tim Delaney wrote:
>
>
> %LOCALAPPDATA% should always contain the same value as would be returned
> from SHGetFolderPath with CSIDL_LOCAL_APPDATA.
>
> Except when it gets changed. Documentation should reflect the actual use
> in the code. If it uses the SHGetFolderPath, that is what should be
> documented; if it uses the environment variable, that is what should get
> documented. Users can easily change the environment variable (which might
> be a reason to use it, instead of SHGetFolderPath).
>

Didn't think of that - good point.

Tim Delaney
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] py.ini documentation improvement

2013-11-28 Thread Terry Reedy

On 11/28/2013 4:04 PM, Tim Delaney wrote:

I was just getting Jython working with py.exe, and I think the
documentation can be made a bit more friendly. In particular think we
can make it easier for people to determine the correct folder by
changing the line in 3.4.4.1 Customization via INI files:

Two .ini files will be searched by the launcher - py.ini in the current
user’s "application data" directory (i.e. the directory returned by
calling the Windows function SHGetFolderPath with CSIDL_LOCAL_APPDATA)
and py.ini in the same directory as the launcher.

to

Two .ini files will be searched by the launcher - py.ini in the current
user’s "application data" directory (i.e. the directory returned by
executing `echo %LOCALAPPDATA%` in a command window) and py.ini in the
same directory as the launcher.


'Two .ini files will be searched by the launcher' sort of implies to me 
that the files exist. On my Win7 machine, echo %LOCALAPPDATA% returns 
C:\Users\Terry\AppData\Local. If I go to Users/Terry with Explorer, 
there is no AppData. (Same with admin user.) C:\Windows contains 
py(w).exe, but no py.ini. Clearer would be


The launcher will search for py.ini in two possible places -- first in 
the same directory as the launcher; second in the current user's 
"application data" directory .


I am pretty sure that order is important and that my version, not the 
current version, is correct.


--
Terry Jan Reedy


___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] py.ini documentation improvement

2013-11-28 Thread martin


Quoting Terry Reedy :

'Two .ini files will be searched by the launcher' sort of implies to  
me that the files exist. On my Win7 machine, echo %LOCALAPPDATA%  
returns C:\Users\Terry\AppData\Local. If I go to Users/Terry with  
Explorer, there is no AppData. (Same with admin user.)


Are you sure about this? What happens if you type "%LOCALAPPDATA%"
(without quotes) into the explorer's address bar?

Regards,
Martin


___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] py.ini documentation improvement

2013-11-28 Thread Terry Reedy

On 11/28/2013 5:35 PM, [email protected] wrote:


Quoting Terry Reedy :


'Two .ini files will be searched by the launcher' sort of implies to
me that the files exist. On my Win7 machine, echo %LOCALAPPDATA%
returns C:\Users\Terry\AppData\Local. If I go to Users/Terry with
Explorer, there is no AppData. (Same with admin user.)


I initially intended to write "there is no AppData *visible*". Then I 
switched to my win7 admin account and there was still no AppData 
visible, for any user. This is unlike with XP where things not visible 
to 'users' become visible as admin.



What happens if you type "%LOCALAPPDATA%"
(without quotes) into the explorer's address bar?


It displays C:\Users\Terry\AppData\Local on the bar and the contents in 
the box below. The py.ini doc might mention this as a way to get there. 
Thanks.


--
Terry Jan Reedy

___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] py.ini documentation improvement

2013-11-28 Thread Tim Delaney
On 29 November 2013 10:59, Terry Reedy  wrote:

> On 11/28/2013 5:35 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>
>> Quoting Terry Reedy :
>>
>>  'Two .ini files will be searched by the launcher' sort of implies to
>>> me that the files exist. On my Win7 machine, echo %LOCALAPPDATA%
>>> returns C:\Users\Terry\AppData\Local. If I go to Users/Terry with
>>> Explorer, there is no AppData. (Same with admin user.)
>>>
>>
> I initially intended to write "there is no AppData *visible*". Then I
> switched to my win7 admin account and there was still no AppData visible,
> for any user. This is unlike with XP where things not visible to 'users'
> become visible as admin.


By default in Win7 AppData is a hidden folder - you need to go to  Tools |
Folder Options | View | Show hidden files, folders and drives to see it in
Explorer (no matter what user you're logged in as).

If the py.ini location does become defined in terms of %LOCALAPPDATA% then
suggesting to use that value in the Explorer address bar would probably be
the easiest way for people to get to the correct directory.

Tim Delaney
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] py.ini documentation improvement

2013-11-28 Thread Terry Reedy

On 11/28/2013 7:06 PM, Tim Delaney wrote:


By default in Win7 AppData is a hidden folder - you need to go to  Tools


On my system, that is Control Panel, not Tools.


| Folder Options | View | Show hidden files, folders and drives to see
it in Explorer (no matter what user you're logged in as).


Thanks, done (and another desired change made also).


If the py.ini location does become defined in terms of %LOCALAPPDATA%
then suggesting to use that value in the Explorer address bar would
probably be the easiest way for people to get to the correct directory.


--
Terry Jan Reedy

___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] py.ini documentation improvement

2013-11-28 Thread Tim Delaney
On 29 November 2013 13:17, Terry Reedy  wrote:

> On 11/28/2013 7:06 PM, Tim Delaney wrote:
>
>  By default in Win7 AppData is a hidden folder - you need to go to  Tools
>>
>
> On my system, that is Control Panel, not Tools.


Sorry - was referring to the Explorer "Tools" menu, which is likewise
hidden by default ... so many things that I change from the defaults when
setting up a Windows machine - it's become so automatic that I forget what
is hidden from most users.

Tim Delaney
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] py.ini documentation improvement

2013-11-28 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 29 November 2013 12:27, Tim Delaney  wrote:
> On 29 November 2013 13:17, Terry Reedy  wrote:
>>
>> On 11/28/2013 7:06 PM, Tim Delaney wrote:
>>
>>> By default in Win7 AppData is a hidden folder - you need to go to  Tools
>>
>>
>> On my system, that is Control Panel, not Tools.
>
>
> Sorry - was referring to the Explorer "Tools" menu, which is likewise hidden
> by default ... so many things that I change from the defaults when setting
> up a Windows machine - it's become so automatic that I forget what is hidden
> from most users.

Turning my Windows gaming machine back to the default settings and
trying to bootstrap pip was one of the key things that got me
motivated to work on PEP 453. It still astounds me that one company
can both create Visual Studio, *and* make it difficult to configure a
machine to be suitable for software development, but I guess that's
enterprise companies for you :)

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   [email protected]   |   Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] py.ini documentation improvement

2013-11-28 Thread Stephen J. Turnbull
Nick Coghlan writes:

 > Turning my Windows gaming machine back to the default settings and
 > trying to bootstrap pip was one of the key things that got me
 > motivated to work on PEP 453. It still astounds me that one company
 > can both create Visual Studio, *and* make it difficult to configure a
 > machine to be suitable for software development, but I guess that's
 > enterprise companies for you :)

Those of us who study management for a living are definitely not
surprised.  I recommend Robert Townsend's "Call Yourself Up" from _Up
the Organization_: he advises CEOs to ring up the company's toll-free
number and find out what the customers deal with.  Urk!

This is the "same s---, different dept", that's all.  And it's a lot
harder to avoid than most folks think.

Kudos to Nick for "calling himself up", to python-dev for creating a
language and development ecology with so few unnecessary barriers, and
to Guido for setting the tone!


___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com