Larry Hastings added the comment:
Okay, I think *I* reproduced it.
1) I pulled your cpython350 fork down locally.
2) I updated to your checkin that fixed the bug. (c31dad22c80d)
3) I reverted the change to Modules/timemodule.c to put the bug back:
% hg cat -r 97393 Modules/timemodule.c
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Reassigning to 3.6.
--
priority: deferred blocker -> release blocker
versions: +Python 3.6 -Python 3.4, Python 3.5
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.or
Larry Hastings added the comment:
I'm leaving this open just because we're apparently waiting on some "What's
New" docs.
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.py
Larry Hastings added the comment:
I suspect we're not fixing this in 3.4, so I'm removing 3.4 from the version
list.
--
versions: -Python 3.4
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Well, I'm already holding up rc3 on one other issue, might as well fix this
too. Can somebody make me a pull request?
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Larry Hastings added the comment:
So, whatever the security hole is that subprocess.call(shell=True) leaves open,
os.startfile() doesn't have? os.startfile() doesn't use a shell? (How does it
find the full path to the executable?)
--
___
Python
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Steve, did you confirm that the test triggers the array bounds bug when the
patch *isn't* applied? I want to confirm both that a) the test exercises the
bug, and b) the fix fixes the bug. I assume you ran the test suite with the
patch applied, so
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Backout pull request merged, please forward-merge, thanks!
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Backout pull request merged, please forward-merge, thanks!
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Larry Hastings added the comment:
I want to ship something, but I don't think it'll be either of those patches in
their current form.
Maybe I'm dense, but I don't feel like I understand these patches. They have
very different approaches.
The first one attempts to rehabilitate the patch
Larry Hastings added the comment:
So is this considered broken enough that I need to accept a fix for 3.5.0? And
has a consensus been reached about exactly what that fix would be?
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
Larry Hastings added the comment:
(I meant, just normal pull request. I did your two pull requests right in a
row and got my wires crossed.)
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Having slept on it, I agree with Steve. We should make the minimal change
necessary in order to not crash.
However, it still needs a regression test. The test can use JohnLeitch's
proposed test as a good starting point, but it must accept either success
Larry Hastings added the comment:
I'm going to back this out of 3.5.0rc3. I'm still willing to discuss accepting
it into 3.5.0 final in some form, but for now I don't want to hold up the
release.
Steve: it should never be possible to crash the Python interpreter with
well-formed Python code
Changes by Larry Hastings <la...@hastings.org>:
--
priority: release blocker -> deferred blocker
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.pyt
Larry Hastings added the comment:
I have convinced myself that disallowing trailing % marks on all platforms is
the right thing to do. Whether or not the underlying platform tolerates it, it
is never *valid* input to strftime.
I have a patch incubating at home. I'll put it up for review
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Oh, maybe it was all like that before. Sorry, I was in a hurry and not in a
charitable frame of mind.
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Larry Hastings added the comment:
What happened with this?
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue24585>
___
___
Pyth
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Rather than debating about how various platforms handle malformed format
strings for strftime(), and whether or not they crash, we should simply prevent
the native strftime() function from seeing them in the first place.
I'd like the "v3" patch i
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Because the BDFL asked that it be so.
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue24912>
___
__
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Okay. Right now creating server-side clones is broken. So I have repurposed
one of my existing (old, dead) server-side clones for testing this. It's
called "ssh://h...@hg.python.org/larry/path_error2".
I just fired off this change on all t
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Pull request accepted. Please forward-merge. Thanks!
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Larry Hastings added the comment:
The tests from this patch fail on Linux.
-
First: There is no trailing % test on Linux, and glibc's strftime() happily
ignores a trailing %, so no ValueError is raised.
Python should do either one or the other of the following:
1) Python should enforce
Changes by Larry Hastings <la...@hastings.org>:
--
assignee: -> ncoghlan
resolution: -> fixed
stage: commit review -> resolved
status: open -> closed
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http:/
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Pull request accepted. I had to do it manually, as I got a Misc/NEWS merge
conflict. But from where I'm sitting it looks like Bitbucket understands the
pull request was accepted and merged.
Please forward-merge. Thanks
Larry Hastings added the comment:
The starting curly brace goes on the same line as the statement starting the
block. Keywords followed by a left parenthesis get a space between the keyword
and the parenthesis. It's a small matter, I'm really much more interested in
reconciling the behavior
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Sorry, maybe you inherited those violations. I was in a hurry and not in a
charitable frame of mind.
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Pull request accepted. Please forward merge, thanks!
And, yes, this will be a null merge because you already separately committed it
to 3.5.
--
assignee: larry -> gvanrossum
stage: needs patch -> resolved
status: open -&g
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Yes, I'd like this fix in 3.5.0.
One bit of feedback on the patch: outbuf is a char * (or wchar_t *), therefore
outbuf[1] is a char (or wchar_t). You shouldn't compare it to NULL. I'm not
sure we still support any compilers that define NULL as (void *)0
Larry Hastings added the comment:
The pull requests are numbered by creation order, not by merge order.
Normally I'd expect that yes, Serhiy's merge would include yours. But it
didn't work out that way. If you look at the changeset graph:
https://bitbucket.org/larry/cpython350/commits/all
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Can we close this out?
--
nosy: +larry
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue23623>
___
__
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Anything happening with this? We tag 3.5.0rc3 in about 36 hours.
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Changes by Larry Hastings <la...@hastings.org>:
--
nosy: -larry
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue21998>
___
__
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Anything happening with this? We tag 3.5.0rc3 in about 36 hours.
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Anything happening with this? We tag 3.5.0rc3 in about 36 hours.
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Larry Hastings added the comment:
I've remarked it as "normal" priority and moved it to 3.6. Not my problem
anymore! :D
--
priority: deferred blocker -> normal
versions: +Python 3.6 -Python 3.4, Python 3.5
___
Python
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Is anyone going to try and fix this for 3.5.0? Or should we "kick the can down
the road" and reassign it to 3.6?
--
nosy: +larry
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.py
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Surely this is too late for 3.5?
--
nosy: +larry
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Larry Hastings added the comment:
I sure hope not.
--
nosy: +larry
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue22980>
___
___
Larry Hastings added the comment:
I will happy delegate to Tim Peters whether or not this should be fixed in
3.5.0, or whether it should wait until 3.5.1 or even 3.6.
Tim, ball's in your court!
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
Changes by Larry Hastings <la...@hastings.org>:
--
priority: deferred blocker -> high
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.pyt
Larry Hastings added the comment:
There won't be conflicts with Serhiy's merge--just the opposite. His pull
request was merged first, so it's perfect that he did his forward merge first.
He's already resolved any conflicts with his merge, and so when you merge
you'll only have to worry
Larry Hastings added the comment:
That *is* easier, thanks. Though the UI for that is baffling. Protip: search
for the section where all the "custom" builders are listed all in one section,
three-quarters of the way down the page.
--
Larry Hastings added the comment:
On the other hand, I do not hold with marking a minor cosmetic change like this
as "release blocker". I'm willing to accept the change, given PEP 434, but I'm
not going to delay any releases for it.
--
priority: release blocker
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Mark, Victor, Benjamin: how do you feel about v2 patch vs rolling back the
change entirely?
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Well, this is making me nervous to apply during the RCs. But... I'm willing to
risk it.
My price: I want to see this run on a bunch of otherwise-healthy buildbots to
make sure it doesn't break any platforms.
In case you've never done such a thing, here's
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Terry, if you want this pulled in to Python 3.5.0, you'll need to create a pull
request on Bitbucket. Instructions are here:
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015-August/141167.html
and here:
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Yes, please create a pull request for this patch. Thanks!
And just to confirm: I just applied patch 2 to CPython, then undid the change
to bytesio.c. The new test fails, and sometimes Python will segmentation
fault. If I then apply the patch to bytesio.c
Changes by Larry Hastings <la...@hastings.org>:
--
priority: high -> release blocker
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.pyt
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Pull request accepted. Please forward-merge. Thanks!
--
resolution: -> fixed
stage: patch review -> resolved
status: open -> closed
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.pyt
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Pull request accepted, please forward-merge. Thanks!
> There is something odd about the size of your clone. My cpython
> clone is 928 MB on disk with 30300 files, while the clone of my fork
> of your repository is 1.59 GB for 14500 files.
I have no
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Merged. Please forward-merge to 3.5.1 and 3.6, thanks!
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Assigning to Brett, who has agreed to do the merge to 3.5.0 that Raymond has
declined to do.
--
assignee: larry -> brett.cannon
nosy: +brett.cannon
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bug
Larry Hastings added the comment:
> too late for 3.5.0
How's that?
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue23517>
___
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Good catch! Please file a pull request via bitbucket.
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Larry Hastings added the comment:
This exciting new feature was added in checkin c0d25de5919e addressing issue
#22986. Perhaps the core devs who added it would like to chime in.
--
nosy: +benjamin.peterson, njs
___
Python tracker rep
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Please create a pull request at your earliest convenience.
--
priority: high - release blocker
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24913
Larry Hastings added the comment:
https://docs.python.org/devguide/devcycle.html#release-candidate-rc
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015-August/141167.html
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24913
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Given that capsulethunk is only needed for 2.6 (and previous), and those
versions are no longer maintained by the Python core community, yes I'd be
happy for you to take over maintainership and host it externally. I'm sure we
could change the documentation
Larry Hastings added the comment:
That's correct, it's just in 3.5.0 at the moment.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24769
Larry Hastings added the comment:
As Python 3.5 Release Manager, my official statement is: Eek!
--
priority: high - release blocker
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24912
Larry Hastings added the comment:
If this has been broken since 3.3, I don't think it's a release blocker for
3.5. I'm willing to consider it a bug and accept a fix, but I'd prefer it to
be as low-risk as possible (aka the Python version). Can someone fix the
regressions?
And, if the C fix
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Please either mark as wontfix or send me a pull request.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24844
Larry Hastings added the comment:
The C implementation is making me nervous. My gut feeling is the Python
implementation would be easier to get right.
I still don't quite understand: what is the user-perceived result of this
change? Module authors issuing a DeprecationWarning can now use
Changes by Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org:
--
title: The new import system makes it impossible to correctly issue a
deprecation warning for a module - The new import system makes it inconvenient
to correctly issue a deprecation warning for a module
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Pull request accepted and merged.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24847
___
___
Python-bugs
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Pull request accepted and merged.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue21167
___
___
Python-bugs
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Pull request accepted and merged.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24867
___
___
Python-bugs
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Yes, I'll accept this into 3.5.0, please send a pull request.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24769
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Is it really *impossible* to correctly issue a deprecation warning for a
module, as the title asserts? Or does the new import system simply make it
*tiresome*?
if sys.version_info.major == 3 and sys.version_info.minor == 4:
stacklevel = 8
elif
Changes by Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org:
--
resolution: - fixed
stage: commit review - resolved
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24847
Larry Hastings added the comment:
I wanted to get this in to Python 3.5.0rc2, so I checked it in myself. Petr, I
gave you credit in the checkin comment and Misc/NEWS. Hope that's okay!
--
resolution: - fixed
stage: commit review - resolved
status: open - closed
versions: +Python 3.6
Larry Hastings added the comment:
To make the tarballs, I use the release.py script from here:
https://hg.python.org/release
and run release.py --export versionnumber. I haven't peeked inside the
black box to see how the sausage is made
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Assuming that ICC_NAN_STRICT is only on for Intel icc: yes, please.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue21167
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Yep. This time I have foisted nearly all the work, including the
forward-merging, onto y'all.
*sits back, sips iced coffee*
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24492
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Can anyone else confirm this bug in 3.4?
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue17703
___
___
Python
Larry Hastings added the comment:
I'd need to see the patch to be certain, but yes my assumption is I'd accept a
pull request for this.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24844
Larry Hastings added the comment:
With PEP 448, we can now have
fronkulate(**kwargs, **kwargs2)
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue9232
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Uh, Nick? You didn't add me to this bug.
--
nosy: +larry
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24769
Larry Hastings added the comment:
They are currently in sync, yes. The 3.5 branch has been a ghost town the last
day or two, which tbh has been pleasant for me.helpfu
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24839
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Merged. Please forward-port to 3.5.1 and 3.6. Thanks!
(See? Already I can tell this rc-cycle is going to be way easier on me than
3.4 was.)
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org
Larry Hastings added the comment:
I would like the fix in 3.5. However, I'm not qualified to review the code.
Can you get a qualified reviewer in to look over the code?
Once someone suitable has reviewed it, I'll accept a pull request (pasted in
here naturally
Changes by Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org:
--
assignee: larry - brett.cannon
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24492
___
___
Python
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Not yet. I'll open it after I release 3.5.0rc1. I'll send email to clp-d and
clp-c when I do. I can email you privately too if you like.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Yes, Eric and Armin are both qualified reviewers in my book. You have my
blessing to send a pull request.
Thanks, everybody!
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24492
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Yes, I'll accept that for 3.5.0. Paste a link to a pull request here at your
earliest convenience (and opportunity).
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24839
Larry Hastings added the comment:
My Bitbucket repo is now public.
https://bitbucket.org/larry/cpython350
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24492
Larry Hastings added the comment:
My Bitbucket repo is now public.
https://bitbucket.org/larry/cpython350
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24839
New submission from Larry Hastings:
The Snow Leopard buildbot for Python 3.5 consistently fails in the regression
test for the email module.
The 3.5 buildbots are here:
http://buildbot.python.org/all/waterfall?category=3.5.stable
Example log file:
http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Fixed. Thanks, Serhiy!
--
resolution: - fixed
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24824
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Yeah, I stopped it at 300k iterations. No problems. Glad this fix got in for
rc1.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24667
Changes by Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org:
--
priority: release blocker - high
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24732
New submission from Larry Hastings:
As discussed in #24824, inspect.Parameter currently only has a place to store
the value of a default argument. Which means, if a complicated bit of code was
used to produce that default argument, all we have left is the value, not the
code that arrived
Larry Hastings added the comment:
Quoting from PEP 101:
release blocker - Stops the release dead in its tracks. You may not
make any release with any open release blocker bugs.
So, yeah, I want to.
--
priority: release blocker - critical
Changes by Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org:
--
priority: release blocker - high
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24272
Changes by Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org:
--
priority: release blocker - high
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue23973
New submission from Larry Hastings:
The Python 3.5 buildbot for Windows 7 consistently fails during test_asyncio.
The buildbots are here:
http://buildbot.python.org/all/waterfall?category=3.5.stable
An example log file:
http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/x86%20Windows7%203.5/builds/173
Larry Hastings added the comment:
I don't have one either. But that's why we've got buildbots. The Windows 7
buildbot, where I first noticed the regression, is here:
http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/x86%20Windows7%203.5
It should be done testing your patch 1 hour and 15 minutes from
Larry Hastings added the comment:
We're retagging 3.5.0rc1 to fix this and one other regression. Can someone
step up and get this fix checked in in the next six or eight hours? You can
just check in to the 3.5 branch on hg.python.org/cpython like normal (you won't
have to use Bitbucket
Larry Hastings added the comment:
We're retagging 3.5.0rc1 to fix this and one other regression. Can someone
step up and get this fix checked in in the next six or eight hours? You can
just check in to the 3.5 branch on hg.python.org/cpython like normal (you won't
have to use Bitbucket
701 - 800 of 2361 matches
Mail list logo
