See:
https://bugs.python.org/issue6721?@ok_message=msg%20339458%20created%0Aissue%206721%20message_count%2C%20messages%20edited%20ok&@template=item#msg339458
I expect to get the knee jerk response.
Meanwhile, I'm trying this hack which ... deletes a lock :-/
diff --git a/testing/utils/fab/logutil.py b/testing/utils/fab/logutil.py
index 0fdd22fde..502d6855c 100644
--- a/testing/utils/fab/logutil.py
+++ b/testing/utils/fab/logutil.py
@@ -158,6 +158,9 @@ class DebugHandler(logging.Handler):
self.setLevel(NONE)
self.setFormatter(_DEBUG_FORMATTER)
+ def createLock(self):
+ self.lock = None
+
def emit(self, record):
for stream_handler in self.stream_handlers:
stream_handler.emit(record)
the lock was ensuring that all the stream handlers write the logging
records in the same order.
The next mystery is why pexpect felt it needed to use pty.fork() (via
some custom pty code) and not pty.spawn(). pty.spawn() would avoid
all this mess.
BTW, kvmrunner.py now also responds to SIGUSR1 ....
Andrew
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 11:36, D. Hugh Redelmeier <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> | From: D. Hugh Redelmeier <[email protected]>
>
> | Andrew seems to have found a Python bug report for this bug. No fix,
> | but a bug report:
> |
> | <https://bugs.python.org/issue35866?>
>
> I've filed a Fedora bug report:
> <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1691434>
> _______________________________________________
> Swan-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.libreswan.org/mailman/listinfo/swan-dev
_______________________________________________
Swan-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libreswan.org/mailman/listinfo/swan-dev
