On Thursday 05 January 2006 08:23, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Dunno, but I'm always having problems w/ Solaris tar, so I just use
> GNU tar on Solaris. ;)
Maybe we should switch to cpio-based distributions?
Anthony
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@pyth
Ronald> This should do it, although I haven't tested this on OSX 10.3:
Not quite. On my 10.3 system MAC_OS_X_VERSION_10_ for in 0, 1, 2, 3,
4 is defined. However, MAC_OS_X_VERSION_MAX_ALLOWED is defined to be
MAC_OS_X_VERSION_10_3.
This works for me (compiles with no warnings, passes all
[Trent Mick wrote]
> Or for separate logic projects being built with the same builtbot
s/logic/logical/
Trent
--
Trent Mick
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubsc
[Brian Warner wrote]
>...
> The only lingering issues are with status delivery: the main HTML
> "Waterfall" HTML will interleave builds of both branches on the same
> page, which could be a bit confusing (if the top line is red, does
> that mean the trunk is broken, or the 2.4 branch?).
Or for se
Weber, Gregoire wrote:
> Questions
> -
Notice that this article is not appropriate for python-dev.
If you ask "is it the case that Python behaves such and such?",
you have a python-list (comp.lang.python) question. For
python-dev, the question should be formulated as "because
it is such an
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Unfortunately, /usr/bin/type doesn't seem to accept the -t flag for me
> on Solaris 9. Okay, so what's the best (read: portable) way to do this?
The portable way would be to check for svnversion in configure, and then
only use it if it was found. You could also check for .sv
On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 22:01 +0100, Reinhold Birkenfeld wrote:
> Recently, someone on dclpy posted about an error he got
> when he tried to unpack the Python distribution tarball
> with Sparc Solaris 9's tar:
>
> tar: directory checksum error
>
> With GNU tar, it worked correctly.
>
> Is this a k
Tim Peters wrote:
> [Reinhold Birkenfeld]
>> Recently, someone on dclpy posted about an error he got
>> when he tried to unpack the Python distribution tarball
>> with Sparc Solaris 9's tar:
>>
>> tar: directory checksum error
>>
>> With GNU tar, it worked correctly.
>>
>> Is this a known issue, or
[Reinhold Birkenfeld]
> Recently, someone on dclpy posted about an error he got
> when he tried to unpack the Python distribution tarball
> with Sparc Solaris 9's tar:
>
> tar: directory checksum error
>
> With GNU tar, it worked correctly.
>
> Is this a known issue, or is it irrelevant?
It's a kn
Recently, someone on dclpy posted about an error he got
when he tried to unpack the Python distribution tarball
with Sparc Solaris 9's tar:
tar: directory checksum error
With GNU tar, it worked correctly.
Is this a known issue, or is it irrelevant?
Reinhold
--
Mail address is perfectly valid!
On 4-jan-2006, at 0:51, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
> On Jan 3, 2006, at 3:12 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>
>> Bob Ippolito wrote:
>>> Who's going to bother?
>>
>> It violates PEP 7, unless you argue that OS X/gcc is not
>> a "major compiler".
>
> Clearly, but that still doesn't answer the question of w
This is more a question for c.l.py. My own suggestion is to go back to
a single shared interpreter; what's the value of separate interpreters
if you're sharing objects anyway? Sharing Python code between
interpreters is definitely not supported. If you insist on separate
interpreters, an alternativ
Hi,
At the company I work for we've embedded Python 2.4.1 in a C++
application. We execute multiple scripts concurrenlty, each one in its
own interpreter (created using Py_NewInterpreter()).
We are sharing a certain instance between interpreters because its to
expensive to instantiate that class
I'd say go right ahead and submit a change to SF (and then after it's
reviewed you can check it in yourself :-).
The only reason I can think of why this isn't done yet would be that
nobody thought of it.
Of course there are other ill-advised combinations, like write
followed by read for which std
Twice now, I've been bitten by the 'mixing file-iteration with readline'
issue. (Yeah, twice.. Good thing I don't write anything important in
Python ;) I've also seen a number of newbies bitten by the same thing. The
issue, for those that aren't aware, is that when mixing file-iteration and
readli
> "Martin" == Martin v Löwis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Martin> It *is* a bug for Python to emit warnings on "major
Martin> platforms" (PEP 7).
OK, I'm as big a standards bigot as the next guy, you hooked me.
After some consideration, I can't write the patch, though. I'm sorry
that
Garbage Collector findings
To understand pythons garbage collector better and to get
a picture about the runtime behaviour and performance
I did some experiments:
The attached script allocates a lot of circularly self
referencing lists. Then it instantiates a one item list.
I tuned the loop co
Walter Dörwald wrote:
> And while we're at it, could you remove the "commit of" too? IMHO it
> just obscures the real content of the subject.
Done. FYI, the rationale for this prefix was that post-commit
distinguishes between "commit" and "revprop", where revprop
would indicate that properties cha
> Currently, branches are not supported, because buildbot is
> somewhat limited. When I get a solution for this problem,
> I plan to have all buildbots build both the trunk and the
> 2.4 branch; such builds would only be initiated whenever
> something is committed on the branch.
Branch support app
19 matches
Mail list logo
