Bugs item #1460493, was opened at 2006-03-29 09:16 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by loewis You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=1460493&group_id=5470
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: HVB bei TUP (hvb_tup) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Why not drop the _active list? Initial Comment: I am using a modified version of subprocess.py, where I have removed the _active list and all references to it. I have tested it (under Windows 2000) and there were no errors. So what is the reason for managing the _active list at all? Why not drop it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Martin v. Löwis (loewis) Date: 2006-03-29 22:41 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=21627 The purpose of the _active list is to wait(2) for open processes. It needs to stay. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Tristan Faujour (tfaujour) Date: 2006-03-29 15:59 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1488657 I agree. The use of _active makes subprocess.py thread-UNsafe. See also: Bug #1199282 In order to have a thread-safe subprocess.py, I commented out the call to _cleanup() in Popen.__init__(). As a side effect, _active becomes useless. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=1460493&group_id=5470 _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
