Milko Krachounov pyt...@milko.3mhz.net added the comment:
The patch doesn't seem to work.
I added this before closerange in _close_all_but_a_sorted_few_fds:
print(Closing, start_fd, up to, fd, exclusive)
And used the attached script to run as a subprocess to check for open fds
(taken from my
Changes by Milko Krachounov pyt...@milko.3mhz.net:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file20011/test_pass_fds.py
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue6559
___
Changes by Milko Krachounov pyt...@milko.3mhz.net:
Added file:
http://bugs.python.org/file20012/subprocess-pass_fd_fix_example.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue6559
___
Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org added the comment:
I've committed this feature just in time for 3.2beta1 (so it can't be said i'm
adding a feature after the beta ;). r87026
It still needs tests and documentation. It doesn't break any existing tests.
I'll take care of that after some sleep.
New submission from Zhigang Wang w1z...@gmail.com:
The current subprocess.Popen() has a boolean close_fds parameter, which
cannot satisfy all the requirements. Eg. want to pass specific fd to
child process, but close others.
This patch adds a extra parameter pass_fds to subprocess.Popen's
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc amaur...@gmail.com added the comment:
A couple of unit tests would be great, as well as a paragraph for the
documentation.
--
nosy: +amaury.forgeotdarc
stage: - test needed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
The reason os.closerange() is used is that it can be slow to call
os.close() on lots of fds (I suppose this depends on the OS). See
http://code.python.org/hg/trunk/rev/43caff85ec85
Therefore, the patch should be smart enough to continue using
