Will do. Thanks. > On 29 Mar 2021, at 20:10, Andre McCurdy <armccu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 4:07 PM Devendra Tewari > <devendra.tew...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I did try that but got an error that does not happen when we try os.rename >> first. I'll try to reproduce it again. >> >> I suspect there may be subtle differences in os.rename vs shutil.move with >> respect to what happens when origin and/or destination do not exist or are >> invalid. > > If there are subtle issues which you don't yet understand then that's > all the more reason for not hiding the new shutil.move code behind a > test which will pass for 99.9% of users. Please figure that out before > sending another version of the patch. > >>> On 29 Mar 2021, at 20:00, Andre McCurdy <armccu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 3:45 PM Devendra Tewari >>> <devendra.tew...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Thanks! My bad. The example I looked up in Python docs had a break and I >>>> just realized it was a looping example. >>>> >>>> Here’s the updated patch (or should I submit it again via git send-email?) >>> >>> It would be better to use shutil.move unconditionally in all cases, >>> rather than have a separate shutil.move code path which only gets >>> tested by people doing incremental builds in docker. >>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#150066): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/150066 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/81698791/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
